Cibrarji?  of t:he  t:heological  ^mimxy 

PRINCETON  .  NEW  JERSEY 
PRESENTED  BY 

Princeton  University  Library 

BX  8393  .S42 
Scott,  0. 

The  grounds  of  secession 


Digitized  by  tine  Internet  Arclnive 
in  2014 


https://archive.org/details/groundsofsecessiOOscot 


THE 


GROUNDS  OF  SECESSION 

FKOM  THE 

M.  E.  CHURCH, 

OR, 

BOOK  FOR   THE  TIMES: 

BKING  A'V 

EXAMIIVATION  OF  HER  CONNECTION  WITH  SLAVERY, 
AND  ALSO  OF  HER  FORM  OF  GOVERNMENT. 

BY  REV.  O.  SCOTT. 

REVISED  AND  COKRECTED. 
TO  WHICH  IS  ADDED 

WESLEY  UPON  SLAVERY, 

NEW  YORK: 

PUBLISHED  BY  L.  C.  MATLACK,  NO.  3  SPRUCE  ST, 

roR  THE  nESLEYAN  METHODIST  COnHCCTIOIl  Of  AMCBICA. 

1851, 


INTRODUCTORY. 


In  issuing  a  new  edition  of  this  able  work,  the  publish- 
er feels  prompted  to  say,  that  he  regards  this  compilation 
as  one  of  the  most  important,  and  truth-telling  documents 
that  is  extant  upon  the  subjects  here  treated.  It  is  an 
honor  to  the  memory  of  the  author.  And  though  he  did 
not  claim  originality  in  the  chief  matter  of  the  work, 
still,  the  care  and  judgment  displayed  in  bringing  such  a 
mass  of  facts  within  so  small  a  compass,  was  scarcely 
less  honorable  to  his  talents,  than  to  have  originated  the 
whole  contents  of  the  work.  A  large  edition  has  been 
sold  in  tract  form,  and  the  demand  for  it  is  so  great,  t.iat 
it  is  now  stereotyped,  and  put  in  a  form  more  in  corre- 
spondence with  its  merits.  To  make  this  work  what  it 
professes  to  be,  a  Book  for  the  Times,  the  masterly  tract 
of  Mr.  Wesley  upon  Slavery  is  appended,  which  gives  a 
finish  to  it  that  will  command  an  extensive  patronage. 

March,  1849 


Cha.s'  Wii,lkt9,  print. 
5  Spruce-st.  N.Y. 


THE 

GROUNDS    OF  SECESSION 


FROM  THE 


M.  E.  CHURCH. 


WITHDRAWAL  OF  JOTHAM  HORTON.  ORANGE 
SCOTT,  AND  LAROY  SUNDERLAND. 

With  the  date  of  this  communication  closes 
our  connection  with  the  Methodist  Episcopal 
Church.  We  take  this  step  after  years  of  consid- 
eration, and  with  a  solemn  sense  of  our  responsi- 
bility to  God — we  take  it  with  a  view  to  his  glory 
and  the  salvation  of  souls. 

Twenty  years  and  upwards  of  the  best  part  of 
our  lives  have  been  spent  in  the  service  of  this 
church — during  which  time  Ave  have  formed 
acquaintances  which  have  endeared  to  our 
hearts  multitudes  of  Cluistian  friends.  Many 
of  these  are  true  kindred  spirits,  and  we  leave 
them  with  reluctance.  But  the  view  we  take  of 
our  responsibility  is  not  local  in  its  bearings,  nor 
limited  in  its  duration.  While  we  live,  and  when 
we  die,  we  wish  to  bear  a  testimony  which  shall 
run  parallel  with  coming  ages  :  nay,  with  the  an- 
nals of  eternity.    Many  considerations  of  friend- 


4 


GROUNDS  OF  SECESSION 


ship  as  well  as  our  temporal  interests,  bind  us  to 
the  church  of  our  early  choice.  But  for  the  sake 
of  a  high  and  holy  cause,  we  can  forego  all  these. 
We  wish  to  live  not  for  ourselves,  nor  for  the  pre- 
sent age  alone,  but  for  all  coming  time  ;  nay,  for 
God  and  eternity.  We  have  borne  our  testimony  a 
long  time  against  what  we  considered  wrong  in 
the  M.  E.  Church.  We  have  waited,  prayed,  and 
hoped,  until  there  is  no  longer  any  groimd  for 
hope.  Hence  we  hq,ve  come  to  the  deliberate 
conclusion  that  we  must  submit  to  things  as  they 
are,  or  peaceably  retire.  We  have  unhesitatingly 
chosen  the  latter. 

It  is,  however,  proper,  in  leaving  the  church,  to 
assign  our  reasons.  These  are  mainly,  the  fol- 
lowing : 

1.  The  M.  E.  Church  is  not  only  a  slave-hold- 
ing, but  a  slavery  defending  church. 

2.  The  Government  of  the  M.  E.  Church  con- 
tains principles  not  laid  down  in  the  Scriptures, 
nor  recognized  in  the  usages  of  the  primitive 
church — principles  which  are  subversive  of  the 
rights,  both  of  ministers  and  laymen. 

That  the  M.  E.  Church  is  a  slaveholding  church, 
none  will  deny.  She  allows  her  members  and 
ministers  unrebuked,  to  hold  innocent  human  be- 
ings in  a  state  of  hopeless  bondage — nay,  more, 
she  upholds  and  defends  her  communicants  in 
this  abominable  business !  All  her  disciplinary 
regulations  which  present  a.  show  of  opposition  to 
slavery  are  known  and  acknowledged  to  be  a 


FROM  THE  M.   E.  CHURCFI. 


5 


dead  letter  in  the -South.  And  they  are  as  dead 
in  the  North  as  in  the  South.  Even  the  general 
rule  has  been  altered,  either  through  carelessness 
or  design,  so  as  to  favor  the  internal  slave  trade ; 
and  yet  the  last  General .  Conference  refused  to 
correct  the  error,  knowing;  it  to  be  such  ! 

This  church  has  defended,  in  a  labored  argu- 
ment, through  some  of  her  best  ministers,  the 
present  rightful  relation  of  master  and  slave — in  that 
she  has  never  called  them  to  account  for  putting 
forth  such  a  document. 

She  has  exhorted,  through  her  regularly  con- 
stituted agents  and  highest  officers,  the  trustees  of 
Methodist  churches  to  close  their  pulpits  against 
Methodist  anti-slavery  lecturers. 

She  has  refused,  in  numerous  instances,  through 
her  bishops,  to  entertain,  m  the  annual  confer- 
ences, motions  expressive  of  the  sinfuhiess  of 
slave-holding — motions  for  the  appointment  of 
committees  on  slavery — motions  for  the  adoption 
of  reports  on  slavery ;  and  that,  because  those 
motions  and  reports  contained  the  sentiment,  that 
slaveholding  is  sin — which,  it  was  alleged,  is  con- 
trary to  Methodism,  which  recognizes  and  ap- 
proves of  the  relation  of  master  and  slave  under 
some  circumstances. 

She  has  refused,  through  her  bishops,  to  hear 
the  prayers  of  scores  and  hundreds  of  her  mem- 
bers against  slavery,  in  some  of  the  annual  con- 
ferences. 

She  has  refused  to  publish,  in  her  official  pa- 


6 


GROUNDS  OF  SECESSION 


pers,  several  addresses  of  the  British  Wesieyan 
Conference,  because  they  alkided  to  slavery. 

She  has  arraigned  and  condemned,  withont  the 
forms  of  trial,  members  of  her  highest  ecclesiasti 
cal  assembly,  for  simply  attending  and  speaking 
in  an  anti-slavery  meeting. 

She  has  condemned  modern  abolition,  refusing 
at  the  same  time  to  say,  in  the  language  of  the 
discipline,  that  she  is  as  "  much  as  ever  convinced 
of  the  great  evil  of  slavery." 

She  has  exhorted  her  ministers  and  members 
throughout  the  country  "  wholly  to  refrain"  from 
this  agitatuig  subject. 

She  has  said,  through  some  of  her  annual  con- 
ferences, that  slavery  is  not  a  moral  evil — while 
she  has  repeatedly  refused,  through  her  bishops, 
to  allow  other  annual  conferences  to  express  the 
opposite  sentiment. 

She  has  allowed  without  censure,  one  of  her 
bishops  to  issue  a  labored  address,  in  which  an 
attempt  is  made  to  prove  that  slave-holding  is 
not  only  justified,  but  enjoined  under  some  cir- 
cumstances, by  the  Golden  Rule  !  and  she  has 
published  this  address  in  her  official  papers. 

She  has,  through  her  ministers  and  members, 
disfranchised  and  censured  or  expelled,  class-lead- 
ers, stewards,  exhorters,  and  local  preachers,  for 
the  simple  crime  of  their  abolition  movements. 

She  has,  through  some  of  her  annual  confer- 
ences, prohibited  her  ministers  and  preachers 
from  patronizing  anti-slavery  papers. 


FROM  THE  M.  E.  CHURCH. 


7 


She  has  refused  to  receive  into  some  of  her  an- 
nual conferences,  pious  and  talented  young  men 
on  trial,  for  the  simple  reason,  that  they  were 
active  abolitionists. 

She  has,  through  the  same  medium,  arraigned, 
censured,  suspended,  and  in  some  instances  ex- 
pelled her  ministers,  for  contumacy  and  msubor- 
dination  with  respect  to  abolition; — and  some  of 
these  she  has  followed  from  year  to  year,  by  her 
bishops  and  members  of  other  conferences  for  the 
evident  purpose  of  destroying  their  ministerial 
character  and  influence  ; — subjecting  them  to  re- 
peated, vexatious  and  expensive  trials. 

She  has  two  or  three  times  altered  her  discipline 
to  effect,  as  is  believed,  their  expulsion. 

She  has  removed  Presiding  Elders  from  their 
districts  for  their  abolition  movements ;  suffering, 
as  it  would  seem,  this  crime  to  effect  the  appoint- 
ment of  other  ministers  and  preachers. 

She  has  refused,  in  her  General  Conference  ca- 
pacity, to  re-affirm  her  former  language  of  op- 
position to  slavery,  though  requested  to  do  this 
by  some  thousands  of  her  ministers  and  mem- 
bers. She  has  refused,  in  the  same  capacity,  to 
take  exceptions  to  the  sentiment  of  two  or  three 
annual  conferences,  who  have  said  that  slavery 
is  not  a  moral  evil. 

And  finally,  she  has  adopted  a  resolution  on 
colored  testimony,  which  disfranchises  eighty  thou 
sand  of  her  members — thus  giving  the  weight  of  her 
influence  to  that  slaveholding  legislation  which, 


8 


GROUNDS  OF  SECESSION. 


in  a  civil  point  of  view,  disfranchises  millions  of 
our  fellow  countrymen. 

Add  to  this,  the  fact  that  all  her  official  papers, 
are  so  much  under  the  influence  of  slaveholding, 
that  no  abolitionist  can  be  heard  on  the  subject 
of  slavery  and  abolition,  however  he  may  be 
abused,  traduced  and  misrepresented. 

In  view  of  these  facts  we  ask,  is  not  the  M.  E. 
Church  one  of  the  main  supporters  of  slavery  in 
this  country  1  Has  she  not  defended  it  in  almost 
every  conceivable  way  1  And  is  there  any  pros- 
pect that  this  church  will  ever  be  reformed,  so 
long  as  slavery  exists  in  the  country  1  If  not,  can 
we  obey  the  commands  of  God,  and  continue  in 
fellowship  with  a  church  which  receives,  shields, 
and  defends,  thousands  and  tens  of  thousands, 
who,  according  to  Mr.  Wesley,  are  "  exactly  on 
a  level  with  men-stealers  V'  If  a  large  portion  of 
our  ministers  and  members  were  sheep-stealers 
or  horse-stealers,  there  would  be  more  propriety 
in  covering  them ; — but  when  we  consider  that 
they  make  merchandize  of  the  souls  and  bodies 
of  men,  or  do  that  which  is  tantamount  to  such  a 
traffic,  without  rebuke, — how  can  we  co-operate 
with  them  in  the  great  work  of  reforming  the 
world  1  Others  must  judge  for  themselves,  but 
we  feel  it  our  duty  to  "  come  out  of  her" — to 
"have  no  fellowship"  or  connection  "with  the 
unfruitful  works  of  darkness,"  but  to  "come  out 
from  among  them  and  be  separate  !"  By  this 
course  we  solemnly  believe,  we  can  do  more  for 


FROM  THE  M.   E.  CHURCH. 


9 


the  cause  (f{  the  bleeding  slave,  than  by  continu- 
ing in  a  SLAVERY-DEFENDING  church,  when  there 
can  be  no  hope  of  reforming  her  till  the  comitry 
is  reformed.  But, 

2dly,  The  Goveriynent  of  the  M.  E.  Church  con- 
tains principles  not  laid  down  in  the  Scriptures, 
nor  recognized  in  the  usages  of  the  primitive 
church — ])rinciples  which  are  subversive  of  the 
rights  both  of  ministers  and  laymen. 

While  we  admit  that  no  form  of  church  govern- 
meut  is  laid  down  in  the  Scriptures,  we  contend 
that  principles  are  laid  down  which  are  in  direct 
contravention  with  some  of  the  existing  forms. 

That  the  Roman  Catholic  is  of  this  class,  all  wi'l 
admit.  The  claims  of  the  high  churchmen  are 
believed  to  be  equally  unfounded.  And  though 
the  objectionable  features  in  the  M.  E.  form  of 
church  government  are  less  wide  of  the  mark,  yet 
they  are  as  truly  unauthorized  as  anything  in 
either  of  the  above  mentioned  forms.  Both  Scrip- 
ture and  primitive  usage  recognize  Christians  in 
the  1  gilt  of  one  great  brotherhood — possessing 
essentially  the  same  rights,  subject  only  to  one 
master.  True,  pastors  and  people,  have  their 
l)eculiar  and  distinctive  duties,  but  there  is  to  be 
710  "  lording  it  over  God's  heritage.^ 

From  the  Scriptures  it  is  evident,  that  even  in 
the  times  of  the  apostles,  laymen  were  members 
of  the  highest  councils  of  the  church,  and  Lord 
King  clearly  proves  that  this  was  the  usage  of  the 
Christian  church  for  several  ages.    It  follows, 


10 


GROUNDS  OF  SECESSION 


therefore,  that  the  contrary  practice  is  not  only 
without  Scripture  and  usage,  but  contrary  thereto. 
That  separation  between  ministers  and  laymen 
which  exists  in  the  M.  E.  church,  owes  its  origin 
to  the  assumptions  of  Rome !  It  exists,  we  be- 
ieve,  in  no  other  church.  Even  the  Episcopalian 
church  in  this  country  cannot  elect  a  bishop  witk- 
out  the  concurrence  of  a  hoard  of  lai/menJ 

The  power  which  our  bishoiis  claim  and  exer- 
cise in  the  annual  conferences  is  contrary  to  the 
plainest  principles  of  Christian  responsibility.  All 
religious  associations  must,  in  the  nature  of  things, 
have  the  right  to  express,  without  restraint,  their 
opinions  on  any  moral  question.  But  tliis  no  an- 
nual or  quarterly  conference  in  the  M.  E.  church 
can  do  without  the  consent  of  the  bishop  or  pre- 
siding elder.  But  no  body  of  Christian  men  has 
any  more  right  to  submit  to  such  restraints,  than 
they  have  to  commit  the  entire  keeping  of  the^ 
consciences  to  other  hands.  That  holy  men  of 
God  should  consent,  in  this  enlightened  age,  to 
exercise  such  power  over  the  consciences  of  their 
brethren,  is  truly  astonishing!  but  not  more  so 
than  that  ministers  can  be  found  who  will  peace- 
ably submit  to  such  innovations  upon  their  res- 
ponsibilities to  God !! 

Scarcely  less  objectionable,  is  the  power  con- 
ferred upon  the  bishops  of  the  M.  E.  church,  in 
the  appointment  of  the  preachers.  That  the  en- 
tire destinies  of  three  or  four  thousand  men  should 
be  in  the  hands  of  some  five  or  six  bishops,  so  far 


FROM  THE  M.  E.  CHURCH. 


11 


as  their  fields  of  labor  are  concerned,  seems  to  be 
forbidden  by  the  fact  that  these  bishops  are  fal- 
lible men — that  they  are  often  ignorant  both  of 
the  preachers  and  people ;  and  that  they  cannot 
control  the  openings  of  Providence,  and  the  calls 
of  God.  We  know  the  presiding  elders  are  usually 
called  upon  for  advice  in  this  matter ;  but  there 
is  no  OBLIGATION  on  the  part  of  the  Episcopacy  to 
advise  with  any  one.  And  when  all  must  admit 
that  it  would  be  dangerous  for  the  bishops  to 
exercise  the  power  they  possess,  what  advantage 
can  there  be  in  tneir  possessing  such  power?  If 
it  be  wrong  to  rob  our  fellow-creatures,  how  can 
it  be  right  to  possess  the  legal  poiver  to  do  this? 
But  that  the  bishops  will  ever  be  curtailed  in  their 
prerogatives,  in  this  respect,  there  is  not  the  least 
ground  of  hope,  when  it  is  considered,  that  after 
those  in  the  general  conference  who  were  in  favor 
of  some  reform  in  this  respect,  had  toiled  for  thirty 
years,  namely,  from  1790  to  1820,  and  when,  hav- 
ing finally  succeeded  in  carrying  a  small  com- 
promise measure,  by  a  vote  of  more  than  two- 
thirds  of  the  general  conference,  the  whole  meas- 
ure was  defeated  by  the  minority,  including  two 
bishops — though  one  was  but  a  bishop  elect. 
This  measure  only  provided  that  when  presiding  • 
elders  were  wanted,  the  bishop  should  nominate 
three  times  the  number  wanted,  out  of  whom  the 
conference  should  elect  the  requisite  number  : — 
and  the  presiding  elders  thus  constituted,  were  to 
be  made  an  advisory  council  in  stationing  the 


12 


GROUNDS  OF  SECESSION 


preachers.  This  was  not  what  a  large  portion  of 
the  general  conference  wanted,  but  what  they 
consented  to  take,  as  a  compromise  measure. 
But  Episcopacy  would  not  be  curtailed  in  this  res- 
pect. And  yet  some  of  our  friends  talk  about 
reforming  the  church  in  her  government.  Impos 
sible !  This  can  never  be  done.  History  and 
facts  are  all  against  the  indulgence  of  such  a 
hope.  Could  we  see  the  most  distant  prospect  of 
any  material  change  for  the  better,  we  would  wait 
and  patiently  labor.  We  say  now,  as  we  have 
often  said,  that  reform  and  not  revolution,  is  our 
wish.  But  no  important  church  reform  ever  yet 
took  place  in  the  entire  body,  though  by  secessions, 
the  monster,  power,  has  been  checked  in  his  pro- 
gressive career.  What  would  the  state  of  the 
world  now  have  been,  with  respect  to  popery, 
had  it  not  been  for  Luther  and  the  Reformation  ? 
Who  can  tell  to  what  lengths  tyranny  would  have 
been  carried  ere  this,  had  there  been  no  opposi- 
tion 1  no  secession  1 

If  the  presiding  elders  were  a  legal  council  to 
station  the  preachers,  the  case  would  be  bettered 
but  little,  in  some  respects  at  least,  inasmuch 
as  they  are  created  by  the  bishop  alone,  and  en- 
tirely dependent  on  him  for  their  office.  They, 
therefore,  would  be  mere  echoes  of  his  will. 

Connected  with  this  unrestricted  stationing  au- 
thority, which  the  bishop  possesses,  is  the  power 
to  transfer  preachers  to  any  part  of  the  United 
States,  to  Texas,  or  to  Africa — and  that  too,  not 


FROM  THE  M.   E.  CHURCH. 


13 


only  without  their  consent,  but  against  their  will ' 
Thus,  for  instance,  for  the  simple  crime  of  aboli- 
tion, a  brother  may  be  placed  by  the  bishop 
where,  in  all  probability,  he  would  be  put  either 
out  of  the  church,  or  out  of  the  world.  For,  he 
may  be  transferred  to  a  southern  conference,  to 
which,  if  he  does  not  go,  he  would  lose  his  mem- 
bership in  the  church ;  and  where,  if  he  does  go, 
he  would  be  liable  to  lose  his  head.  It  is  not 
enough,  to  say,  in  reply  to  this,  that  there  is  no 
probability  that  this  power  will  ever  be  exercised, 
because  its  exercise  would  be  wrong ;  for  how 
can  it  be  right  to  possess  this  power,  if  it  would  be 
wrong  to  exercise  it  1 

Another  serious  objection  to  Methodist  Episco- 
pacy, is  the  election  of  bishops  for  life.  Once  a 
bishop,  always  a  bishop,  however  incapacitated 
to  the  performance  of  the  duties  of  the  office  from 
bodily  or  mental  infirmities. 

We  will  mention  but  one  thing  more.  And  that 
is,  that  feature  in  the  economy  of  the  M.  E.  church, 
which  gives  the  power  to  the  preacher  of  exclud- 
ing almost  any  member  he  may  wish  to  get  rid  of. 
True,  the  Discipline  requires  the  forms  of  trial,  in 
case^of  expulsion;  but  as  the  preacher  has  the 
sole  power  to  appoint  the  committee,  and  that 
without  giving  the  accused  any  right  of  challenge, 
it  is  not,  in  general,  difficult,  for  a  preacher  to 
punish  whom  he  pleases,  and  that  for  trifling 
causes,  as  many  can  testify.  And  as  he  has  the 
sole  right  to  appoint  all  the  leaders  and  nominate 


14 


GROUNDS  OF  SECESSION 


all  thQ  stewards,  it  is  of  but  little  consequence  for 
an  expelled  member  to  appeal  to  a  quarterly 
meeting  conference,  if  the  preacher  is  known  to 
be  strongly  prejudiced  against  him — however  un- 
founded that  prejudice  Ynay  be. 

Such,  in  brief,  are  some  of  our  reasons  for 
leaving  the  Methodist  Episcopal  Church. 

We  wish  it  to  be  distinctly  understood,  that  we 
do  not  withdraw  from  any  thing  essential  to  pure 
Wesleyan  Methodism.  We  only  dissolve  our  con- 
liection  with  Episcopacy  and  Slavery.  These  we 
believe  to  be  anti-scriptural,  and  well  calculated 
to  sustain  each  other. 

There  are  many  valuable  things  in  the  economy 
of  Methodism;  these  we  shall  still  adhere  to. 
And  this  we  can  do  without  having  any  connec- 
tion with  what  is  worse  than  objectionable.  We 
know  it  will  be  said,  God  has  greatly  blessed  the 
church,  and  is  evidently  still  owning  her,  and 
therefore  we  ought  not  to  disturb  her  peace  by 
any  discussions  of  her  polity.  The  same  remark 
may  be  made  in  regard  to  slavery.  And  yet  who 
will  pretend  either  that  slavei*y  is  right  because 
God  has  so  wonderfully  blessed  the  church,  or 
that  for  this  reason  we  should  refrain  from  agitat- 
ing her  with  discussions  on  the  subject  1  We 
ask  who  ?  for  we  all  know  that  ar!<!-abolitionists 
have  used  this  very  argument.  Abolitionists,  how- 
ever, have  considered  it  unsound.  Let  them, 
then,  be  careful  how  they  take  precisely  the  same 
ground  in  relation  to  another  matter.   True,  God 


FROM  THE  M.  E.  CHURCH. 


15 


has  blessed  us  ;  but  this  is  not  perhaps  so  much 
owing  to  our  slavery  and  Episcopacy,  as  to  the 
evangelical  character  of  our  doctrines  and  our 
zeal.  And  let  us  not  forget  that  he  has  blessed 
other  churches  too. 

Should  it  be  said  that  God  has  frowned  upon 
all  who  have  left  the  church — it  might  be  replied, 
in  the  first  place,  that  this  is  not  the  fact.  Some 
of  the  secessions  from  the  church  are  prospering 
as  well,  in  proportion  to  their  means,  as  the  M.  E. 
church.  ■  And  secondly,  if  it  were  true,  it  would 
not  prove  that  the  act  of  their  leaving  the  church 
was  displeasing  tp  God — much  less  would  it  prove 
that  no  circumstances  can  exist  which  will  make 
a  secession  justifiable. 

Though  we  entertain  none  other  but  kind  feel- 
iigs  towards  those  we  leave,  yet  we  expect  to  be 
ill-treated  by  our  former  friends.  We  know  how 
it  has  been  with  others  who  have  left.  To  lose 
ministers  and  members  is  a  mortification  to  sec- 
tarian pride.  Those  who  will  defend  the  church 
and  her  usages,  are  fine  fellows  ;  but  the  moment 
they  leave  her  communion,  no  reproachful  epi- 
thets are  too  bad  to  heap  upon  them.  Their  mo- 
tives are  impugned,  and  their  honesty  questioned. 
And  this,  for  effect,  is  sometimes  done  in  advance  ! 
But  we  have  counted  the  cost,  and  are  prej^ared 
to  suffer  persecution.  By  whatever  spirit  some 
of  our  opponents  may  be  actuated,  we  hope  to  be 
saved  from  all  unkind  expressions. 

Though  but  three  of  us  sigu  this  document, 


16 


GROUNDS  OF  SECESSION 


scores,  if  not  hundreds,  to  our  certain  knowledge, 
might  have  easily  been  obtained.  We  did  not 
wish  any  other  names  now.  There  will  be  an  op- 
portunity for  all  who  may  desire  it,  to  follow  our 
example.  We  shall  not  be  disappointed  if  but 
few  do  this  We  have  no  anxiety  on  this  ground. 
We  act  for  ourselves.  Knowing,  however,  that 
there  are  hundreds,  if  not  thousands,  who  enter- 
tain the  same  sentiments  we  do,  we  have  prepar- 
ed an  outline  of  discipline  or  jolan  of  operation — 
a  summary  of  which  will  be  given  in  the  paper 
containing  this  withdrawal.  The  entire  plan  will 
soon  be  published.  It  will  be  seen  fron*!  the  sum- 
mary, that  we  have  made  provision  to  organize 
churches,  if  there  is  a  call  for  it. 

And  now,  dear  brethren  of  the  M.  E.  church, 
we  bid  you  farewell.  Many  of  you  we  know 
and  love.  And  while  we  do  not  impeach  your 
motives  or  honesty,  we  hope  in  turn  you  will  not 
treat  us  as  barbarians.  There  is  room  enough  for 
us  all.    Let  us  have  no  unchristian  contention. 

JOTUAM  HoRTON, 

Orange  Scott, 
LaRoy  Sunderland. 
Providence,  R.  I.  Nov.  8,  1842. 

WITHDRAWAL  OF  REV.  LUTHER  LEE. 
By  this  article,  and  from  its  date,  I  withdraw 
from  the  Methodist  Episcopal  Church.    I  have 
been  a  member  of  her  communion  more  than 


FROM  THE  M.  E.  CHURCH. 


17 


twenty-one  years,  rising  of  sixteen  of  which  have 
been  spent  in  the  ministry,  with  what  snccess 
others  must  judge,  subject  to  the  corrections  of 
the  last  judgment  in  the  light  of  eternity. 

The  first  and  leading  cause  which  has  forced 
my  mind  to  this  conclusion,  is  the  relation  which 
the  church  sustams  to  slavery. 

1.  There  is  no  rule  in  the  Discipline  of  the 
church  prohibiting  the  private  members- of  the 
church  holding  slaves  ;  but,  on  the  contrary,  the 
legislation  of  the  church  supposes  that  they  do  and 
will  continue  to  hold  slaves.  It  is  said,  in  the  sec- 
tion concernhig  slavery,  •'  All  our  preachers  shall 
prudently  enforce  upon  our  members  the  necessity 
of  teaching  their  slaves  to  read  the  word  of  God." 
This  every  one  knows  must  be  a  dead  letter,  as 
the  laws  of  the  slaveholding  States  forbid  the 
teaching  of  slaves  to  read,  while  it  proves  that 
"  our  members"  do  and  are  expected  to  hold 
slaves. 

2.  The  church  has  made  herself  responsible  for 
the  existence  of  slavery,  by  silently  passing  over 
the  acts,  without  reproof,  of  those  ministers  and 
conferences  which  have  openly  and  shamelessly 
justified  slavery  as  a  system.  I  will  give  but  two 
of  these  instances  out  of  many. 

The  following  is  from  an  address  delivered  be- 
fore several  conferences  by  Bishop  Hedding  : — 

"  The  right  to  hold  a  slave  is  founded  on  this 
rule,  '  Therefore,  all  things  whatsoever  ye  would 


18 


GROUNDS  OF  SECESSION 


that  men  should  do  to  you,  do  ye  even  so  to  them , 
for  this  is  the  law  and  the  prophets.'  " 

The  Georgia  Conference  passed  the  following 
resolution  : — 

"  Resolved,  That  slavery,  as  it  exists  in  the  Unit- 
ed States,  is  not  a  moral  evil." 

The  South  Carolina  Conference  passed  a  reso- 
lution of  similar  import. 

There  is  then  but  one  question  to  settle,  and  that 
is,  Is  the  Methodist  Episcopal  Church  responsible 
for  these  sentiments  1  That  slavery  has  been  sanc- 
tioned by  hidividual  ministers  and  constitutional 
bodies  of  the  church,  has  been  clearly  shown ; 
but  has  the  church  so  endorsed  these  proceedings 
as  to  make  herself  responsible  for  them  1  It  is 
clear  to  me  that  she  has. 

(1.)  These  persons  have  never  been  dealt  with 
for  these  sentiments,  as  persons  have  who  have 
held  and  advanced  other  erroneous  and  wicked 
doctrines. 

(2.)  The  Bishops  have  never  remonstrated 
against  the  course  of  those  conferences  which 
have  neglected  to  call  these  advocates  of  slavery 
to  an  account ;  nor  have  they  even  attempted  to 
transfer  these  men  to  other  conferences  to  be  dealt 
with,  which  they  claim  the  jjower  and  right  to  do  j 
but,  on  theotherhand,  they  i^ut  the  resolutionsby 
which  the  conferences  pronounced  slavery  to  be 
right,  which  they  claim  not  to  be  legally  bound  to 
put,  and  for  the  sentiments  of  which  resolutions 
Uiey  say  they  are  responsible  to  the  General  Con* 


FROM  THE  M.  E.  CHURCH. 


19 


ference.  When  they  have  been  urged  to  put  abo- 
lition resohitions,  they  have  declined,  on  the 
ground  that  they  were  i-esponsible  to  the  General 
Conference  for  tlic  resolutions  they  put; — and 
hence  they  must  be  responsible  for  pro-slavery 
resohatioas. 

(3.)  The  General  Conference  has  never  remon- 
strated against  the  neglect  of  the  annual  confer- 
ences to  bring  these  advocates  of  slavery  to  an  ac- 
count, nor  ordered  the  Bishops  to  transfer  them 
to  other  conferences  to  be  dealt  with,  which  it  has 
power  to  do  ;  nor  has  it  condemned  the  proceed- 
ings of  those  conferences  in  adopting  pro-slavery 
resolutions,  notwithstanding  the  minutes  of  the 
same  have  been  before  it  for  examination;  nor 
has  the  General  Conference  censured  the  Bishops 
for  putting  those  resolutions. 

(4.)  While  the  General  Conference  has  suffered 
her  ministers  and  annual  conferences  to  advocate 
slavery,  Avithout  a  single  rebuke,  she  has  con- 
demned modern  abolitionism,  and  condemned 
ministers  for  holding  and  acting  out  the  principles 
of  abolition,  and,  at  the  biddmg  of  slaveholders, 
has  passed  a  resolution  denying  the  oppressed 
colored  members  of  the  church,  in  the  slavehold- 
ing  States,  the  right  of  testifying  to  the  truth  in  a 
church  trial  involving  the  character  of  the  pale- 
faced  oppressor. 

These  facts,  taken  togetlier,  clearly  make  the 
church  responsible  for  slavery. 

I  think  it  has  now  been  ^hoivn,  beyond  the 


20 


GROUNDS  OF  SECESSION 


possibility  of  a  dovibt  in  the  minds  of  such  as 
look  at  the  subject  without  prejudice,  that  the  M. 
E.  Church  has  committed  herself  to  slavery,  so  as 
to  make  herself  responsible  for  its  existence.  I 
will  not  dwell  upon  the  great  wickedness  of  slave- 
ry, but  rely  upon  the  public  sense  of  justice  on 
this  point.  And  the  simple  fact  that  the  church 
is  slaveocratic  in  her  principles,  feelings,  and  ad- 
ministration, is  in  my  view  a  sufficient  reason  foi 
the  dissolution  of  the  connection  I  have  so  long 
held  with  her. 

11.  A  second  reason  which  has  operated  strong- 
ly upon  my  mind,  forcing  me  to  the  conclusion 
that  I  ought  to  withdraw  from  the  church,  is  found 
in  the  principles  of  her  government,  especially  as 
they  have  been  developed  in  the  administration 
since  the  commencement  of  the  anti-slavery  dis- 
cussion. I  have  always  known  that  the  govern- 
ment of  the  church  was  aristocratical  in  its  form 
and  principles,  and  the  greatest '-logical  wonders" 
Avith  which  I  have  ever  met,  have  been  some  few 
efforts  to  prove  that  it  is  republican  or  democratic. 
I  know  that  no  church,  nor  any  class  of  persons 
in  a  church,  has  or  can  have  a  right  to  legislate 
contrary  to  the  laws  of  Christ ;  but  there  are  many 
prudential  rules  which  may  be  enacted  to  suit 
times  and  circumstances;  and  that  the  body  of 
the  laity  should  have  no  voice  in  making  these 
rules,  even  such  of  them  as  more  immediately 
concern  themselves,  I  have  always  viewed  as  ex- 
tremely arbitrary  in  principle  ;  and  that  every  con- 


FROM  THE  M.  E.  CHURCH. 


21 


gregation  throughout  the  denomhiation  should  be 
dependent,  absohitely  so,  on  the  will  of  an  indi- 
vidual for  the  man  who  shall  preach  to  them  the 
word  of  life ;  and  that  every  minister  in  the  con- 
nection should  be  absolutely  dependent  upon  the 
judgment  or  will  of  one  man,  for  his  field  of  labor, 
who  has  power  to  say  whether  he  shall  labor  in 
the  sigh-bui-deued  rice  swamps  of  the  South, 
along  the  shores  of  the  distant  Sabine,  or  in  the 
North,  by  the  cold  waters  of  the  St.  Lawrence,  I 
never  did  believe  liberal  in  principle.  But  I  for- 
merly looked  upon  these  arbitrary  principles  as 
existmg  only  in  form,  and  my  reply  has  always 
been,  when  attacked  on  the  ground  of  the  arbitra- 
ry character  of  our  church  polity,  that  there  was 
no  oppression  in  fact, — that  though  the  govern- 
ment was  arbitrary  in  principle,  yet  the  piety, 
good  sense  and  kind  feelings  of  the  bishops  and 
preachers,  secured  a  liberal  administration.  But 
I  can  no  longer  silence  the  arguments  of  others, 
or  the  voice  of  my  own  judgment,  with  this  plea ; 
— an  occasion  has  arisen,  tliese  arbitrary  princi- 
ples have  been  roused  from  their  slumber,  this  lion 
of  power  has  roared  and  Ituped  from  his  lair  in 
vindication,  not  only  of  his  own  claims,  but  also 
in  vindication  of  slavery  itself.  The  anti-slavery 
discussion  has  been  the  occasion,  and  In  opposi- 
tion to  this,  I  have  seen  persons  expelled  from  the 
church  because  they  were  abolitionists:  I  have 
seen  class-leaders  put  out  of  office  because  they 
would  open  their  mouths  for  the  dumb  ;•  I  have 


22 


GROUNDS  OF  SECESSION 


seen  preachers  suspended  and  silenced,  beeanse 
they  would  plead  for  the  oppressed  slave ;  I  have 
seen  congregations  denied  the  minister  they  de- 
sired, while  othei-s  who  were  not  suspected  of  the 
crime  of  modern  abolitionism,  were  accommodat- 
ed ;  and  I  have  seen  abolition  ministers  sent  to 
distant  or  poor  circuits,  to  which  I  have  reason  to 
believe  they  were  appointed  as  an  episcopal 
chastisement  for  daring  to  say  that  slavery  is  a  sin 
and  ought  to  be  abolished.  I  have  seen  whole 
congregations  pronounced  out  of  the  church,  by  a 
public  declaration  of  the  preachers  whom  the 
Bishop  saw  fit  most  graciously  to  impose  upon 
them  against  their  known  wishes  ;  and  the  princi- 
ple of  this  expulsion  en  masse,  without  a  form  of 
trial,  has  been  officially  sanctioned  by  the  Bishop, 
who  is  authorized  to  decide  all  such  questions. 
These  are  but  some  of  the  developments  of  the 
arbitrary  principles  of  the  government  of  the  M; 
E.  chm-ch,  which  have  been  made  during  the  anti- 
slavery  discussion.  I  might  enlarge  by  adding 
other  facts,  and  illustrations,  but  I  will  leave  this 
qficstion  here  for  the  consideration  of  the  candid. 

III.  A  third  and  final  reason  which  I  shall  now 
render,  for  dissolving  my  cohnection  with  the  M. 
K  Church,  is  the  uncharitable  and  bitter  spirit 
which  is  manifested  on  the  part  of  the  adherents 
of  the  church  and  of  her  official  organs,  towards 
the  dissenting  brethren.  Whenever  a  brother  has 
presumed  to  utter  an  opinion  on  the  subject  of 
church  polity,  differing  from  the  common  views. 


FROM  THE  M.   E.  CnURCH. 


23 


instead  of  meeting  his  views  with  sound  Chris- 
tian arguments  to  convince  him  of  his  error,  the 
usual  method  has  been  at  once  to  denounce  him 
as  an  enemy,  and  assail  his  moral  character.  It 
is  matter  of  history  that  the  advocates  of  our  pre- 
sent form  of  government  have  not  relied  so  much 
upon  the  strength  of  their  arguments,  to  put  down 
more  liberal  views  that  have  occasionally  mani- 
fested themselves  in  the  church,  as  upon  the  force 
of  constitutional  law,  vigorously  administered. 
Even  since  the  secession  of  Brs.  Horton,  Scott, 
and  Sunderland,  it  has  been  insisted  by  some  that 
they  should  be  treated  as  traitors,  and  be  excluded 
from  the  pulpits  of  the  church,  while  others  are 
admitted  who  have  always  held  views  less  in 
accordance  with  the  common  standards  of  the 
church.  They  have  already  been  assailed  as  be- 
ing''sordid"' in  their  purposes;  as  being  under 
the  inflnence  of  "  unhallowed  ambition  as  mak- 
ing "not  an  honest  effort;"  as  being  '-iniqui- 
tous" in  their  proceedings ;  and  by  two  different 
papers,  in  the  interest  of  the  church,  have  the 
words  which  inspiration  has  applied  to  the  self- 
willed,  cruel  and  murderous,  been  applied  to  these 
brethren,  whose  offence  is  that  of  withdrawing 
from  the  church  after  they  have  been  long  abused 
in  it,  and  after  being  often  told  by  the  same  jour- 
nals that,  with  their  views,  they  ought  to  leave 
it.  This  is  an  extravagance  of  intolerence  which 
1  caimot  bear.  To  think  of  retaining  my  stand- 
ing in  the  church,  and  at  the  same  time  honestly 


24  GROUNDS   OF  SRORSflON 

meet  and  rebuke  this  abusive  and  intolerant  spirit, 
wherever  I  shall  meet  with  it,  is  hopeless ;  and  to 
remain  in  the  church  by  silently  enduring  it,  and 
thereby  appearing  to  approve  of  what  I  abhor 
and  detest,  would  not  only  require  an  entire 
change  in  my  constitution  and  temperament,  but 
also  a  sacrifice  of  my  principles  to  a  selfish,  cow- 
ardly, worldly  policy.  If  others  are  prepared  to 
make  such  sacrifices,  I  am  not;  and  in  saying 
this,  I  intend  no  impeachment  of  the  motives  of 
others,  but  only  a  vindication  of  "my  own.  I  leave 
behind  many  whom  I  highly  respect  and  most 
ardently  love.  With  many  of  them  I  have  labored 
and  suffered ;  but  now  a  sense  of  duty  compels 
me,  so  far  as  church  relation  is  concerned,  to  sep- 
arate myself  from  them, — and  I  trust  I  do  it  in- the 
fear  of  God,  with  an  eye  single  to  his  glory,  and 
in  the  hope  of  eternal  life. 

LUTHER  LEE. 

Andover,  Dec.  12,  1842. 


FttOM  THE  M.  K.  CHURCH.  25 


THE  M.  E.  CHURCH  AND  SLAVERY. 

[Before  proceeding  to  notice  the  connection  of  the  M.  E. 
Chuich  with  Slavery,  it  may  not  be  improper  to  glance  at 
the  views  of  Mr.  Wesley  and  the  English  Methodists.] 

I 

SECTION  I. 

SENTIMENTS  OF  JOHN  WESLEY  AND  THE  ENGLISH  WE8- 
LEYANS. 

The  slave  trade  was  extensively  carried  on 
during  the  whole  of  Mr.  Wesley's  life.  Chris- 
tians were  generally  asleep  on  the  subject ;  and 
many  professors  of  religion  and  some  ministers 
of  the  gospel  were  extensively  engaged  in  the 
atrocious  business,  even  at  the  time  of  Mr.  Wes- 
ley's death,  and  for  some  years  afterward. 

But  he  was  in  this,  as  in  almost  everything  else, 
fifty  years  before  the  times.  He  published  in  1774, 
seventeen  years  before  his  death,  a  pamphlet  en- 
titled "  Thoughts  on  Slavery,"  which  contains  the 
modern  doctrine  of  the  strongest  and  severest 
writers  on  that  subject.  And  his  pamphlet  has 
probably  done  more  good  in  Europe  and  America, 
than  any  other  single  document  ever  written. 

The  following  extracts  are  from  ttiat  invaluable 
work. 

"  I  strike  at  the  root  of  this  complicated  villainy^ 
I  absolutely  deny  all  slaveholding  to  be  consistent 
with  any  degree  of  natural  justice." 


2$  GROUNDS  OF  SECESSION 


"  That  slaveholding  is  utterly  inconsistent  with 
mercy,  is  almost  too  plain  to  need  a  proof." 

"  And  this  equally  concerns  every  gentleman  tKat 
has  an  estate  in  our  American  plantations ;  yea,  all 

SLAVEHOLDERS,  OF   WHATEVER   RANK  AND  DEGREE; 

seeing  m^n-buyers  are  exactly  on  a  level  with,  men- 
stealers.  You  therefore  are  guilty,  yea,  principally 
GUILTY,  of  all  these  frauds,  robberies,  and  murders. 
You  are  the  sirring  that  puts  all  the  rest  in  motion ; 
they  would  not  stir  a  step  without  you ;  therefore 
the  blood  of  all  these  wretches  who  die  before 
their  time,  whether  in  their  country  or  elsewhere, 
lies  upon  your  head.  '  The  blood  of  thy  brother' 
(for,  whether  thou  wilt  believe  it  or  no,  such  he 
is  in  the  sight  of  Him  that  made  him)  '  crieth 
against  thee  from  the  earth,'  from  the  ship,  and 
from  the  waters.  0,  whatever  it  costs,  put  a  stop 
to  its  cry  before  it  is  too  late :  instantly,  at  any 
price,  were  it  the  half  of  your  goods,  deliver  thy- 
self from  blood  guiltiness !  Thy  hands,  thy  bed, 
thy  furniture,  thy  house,  th  y  lands,  are  at  present  stained 
with  blood !  Surely  it  is  enough ;  accumulate  no 
more  guilt  j  spill  no  more  the  blood  of  the  inno- 
cent! Do  not  hire  another  to  shed  blood ;  do  not 
pay  him  for  doing  it !  Whether  you  are  a  Chris- 
tian or  no,  show  yourself  a  MAN !  -  Be  not  more 
savage  than  a  lion  or  a  bear  ! 

"  Perhaps  you  will  say,  '  I  do  not  buy  any  ne- 
groes ;  I  only  use  those  left  me  by  my  father.'  So 
fa^  it  is  well ;  but  is  it  enough  to  satisfy  your  own 
conscience  ?  Had  your  father,  have  you,  has  any  man 
living,  a  right  to  use  another-  as  a  slave  ?  It  cannot  be, 


FROM   THE  M.   E.   CHURCH.  27 


even  setting  revelation  aside.  It  cannot  be  that 
either  war,  or  contract,  can  give  any  man  such  a 
property  in  another  as  he  has  in  his  sheep  and 
oxen.  Much  less  is  it  possible  that  any  child  of  man 
should  ever  be  born  a  slave.  Liberty  is  the  right  of 
every  human  creature,  as  soon  as  he  breathes  the 
vital  air  ;  and  no  human  law  can  deprive  him  of  that 
right  which  he  derives  from  the  law  of  nature. 

"  If,  therefore,  you  have  any  regard  to  justice, 
(to  say  nothing  of  mercy,  nor  the  revealed  law  of 
God)  render  unto  all  their  due.  Give  liberty  to 
whom  liberty  is  due,  that  is,  to  every  child  of  man, 
to  every  partaker  of  human  nature.  Let  none 
serve  you  but  by  his  own  act  and  deed,  by  his 
own  voluntary  choice.  Away  with  all  whips,  all 
chains,  all  compulsion  !  Be  gentle  toward  all  men ; 
and  see  that  you  invariably  do  unto  every  one  as  you 
would  they  should  do  unto  you. 

J.  V/esi,ey." 

The  following  is  Mr.  Wesley's  dying  testimony. 
This  letter  is  exceedingly  interesting,  inasmuch  as 
it  was  thcj  last  but  two  which  Mr.  Wesley  ever 
wrote,  and  it  is  dated  only  four  days  before  his 
death.  It  was  written  to  the  great  and  good  Mr. 
Wilberforce,  the  pioneer  of  the  abolition  cause  in 
England. 

"London,  Feb.  26,  1791. 
"  Dear  S/r— Unless  the  Divine  power  has  raised 
you  up  as  Athanasius  contra  Mundum  [Athanasius 


28 


GROUNDS  OF  SECESSION 


against  the  world],  I  see  not  how  you  can  go 
through  your  g'lorious  enterprise,  in  opposing  that 
execrable  villany,  which  is  the  scandal  of  religion, 
of  England,  and  of  human  nature.  Unless  God 
has  raised  you  up  for  this  very  thing,  you  will  be 
worn  out  by  the  opposition  of  men  and  devils. 
But,  '  if  God  be  for  you,  who  can  be  against  you  V 
0,  '  be  not  weary  in  well  doing !'  Go  on,  in  the 
name  of  God,  and  in  the  power  of  his  might,  till 
even  American  slavery  (the  vilest  that  ever  saw 
the  sun)  shall  vanish  away  before  it.  Reading  this 
morning  a  tract,  written  by  a  poor  African,  I  was 
particularly  struck  by  that  circumstance — that  a 
man  who  has  a  black  skin,  being  wronged  or  out- 
raged by  a  white  man,  can  have  no  redress ;  it 
being  a  law,  in  all  our  colonies,  that  the  oath  of  a 
black  against  a  white  goes  for  nothing.  Wfiat 
villany  is  this  ? 

«  Your  aflectionate  servant, 

"  J.  Wesley." 

And  yet  the  General  Conference  of  the  M.  E. 
Church  has  been  guilty  of  this  very"  villainy,"  in 
the  black  law  affair. 

The  Wesleyau  Methodist  Conference  in  1830, 
Resolved,  "  That,  as  a  body  of  Christian  ministers, 
they  feel  themselves- called  upon  again  to  record 
their  solemn  judgment,  that  the  holding  of  human 
beings  in  a  state  of  slavery  is  in  direct  opposition  to 
all  the  principles  of  natural  rights,  and  to  the  be- 
nign spirit  of  the  religion  of  Christ. 


FROM  THE  M.  E.  CHURCH. 


29 


"That  the  Conference  fully  concur  in  those 
strong  moral  views  of  the  evil  of  slavery  which  are 
taken  by  their  fellow-Christians  of  different  de- 
nominations ;  and  that  they  express  their  sympa- 
thy with  an  injured  portion  of  their  race,  and 
their  abhorrence  of  all  those  principles  on  which 
it  is  attempted  to  defend  the  subjection  of  human 
beings  to  hopeless  and  interminable  slavery. 

"  That  the  Conference  still  farther  recommend, 
in  the  strongest  manner,  to  such  of  the  members 
of  the  Methodist  societies  as  enjoy  the  elective 
franchise,  that,  in  this  great  crisis,  when  the  ques- 
tion is,  whether  justice  and  hum.anity  shall  tri- 
umph over  oppression  and  cruelty,  or  nearly  a  mil- 
lion of  our  fellow-men,  many  of  whom  are  also 
our  fellow-Christians,  shall  remain  excluded  from 
the  rights  of  humanity,  and  the  privileges  of  that 
constitution  under  which  they  are  born;  they 
will  use  that  solemn  trust  to  promote  the  rescue  of 
our  country  from  the  guilt  and  dishonor  which 
have  been  brought  upon  it  by  a  criminal  conni- 
vance at  the  oppressions  which  have  so  long  ex- 
isted in  its  colonies,  and  that,  in  the  elections  now 
on  the  eve  of  taking  place,  they  will  give  their  in- 
fluence and  votes  only  to  those  candidates  who  pledgk 
THEMSELVES  to  support  in  parliament,  the  most 
effectual  measures  for  the  entiy-e  abolition  of  slavery 
throughout  the  colonies  of  the  British  empire." 

Dr.  Clarke,  in  his  Commentary,  expressed  him- 
self on  the  subject  of  slavery  as  follows  : 

"  In  heathen  countries,  slavery  was  in  some 


30  GROUNDS  OF  SECESSION 

sort  excusable ;  among  Christians,  it  is  an  eno>-mi- 
ty  and  a  crime,  for  which  perdition  has  scarcely  an 
adequate  state  of  punishment." 

Again  he  says — "  I  here  register  my  testimony 
against  the  unprincipled,  inhuman,  anti-christian, 
and  diabolical  slave  trade — with  all  its  authors, 
'promoters,  abettors,  and  sacrilegious •  gains;  as 
well  as  against  the  great  devil,  the  father  of  it 
and  them.." 

The  following  are  extracts  from  Richard  Wat- 
son on  slavery  : 

"  Slavery  was  manstealirig  in  its  origin  ;  and 
with  this  vicious  origin  it  remains  tainted  to  tiiis 
day.  It  would  be  as  hopeless  a  task  to  wa.sh  it 
off,  as  to  wash  the  Ethiop  white.  Characterized 
as  a  ci'ime  against  God  and  man,  the  thin  gauze 
of  sophistry  .cannot  conceal  its  hateful  aspect; 
and  the  attempt  to  find  a  palliation  for  it,  only 
makes  more  audible  those  thunders  which  are 
launched  against  it,  as  one  of  the  most  odious 
crimes  both  in  the  law  and  in  the  Gospel. 

"  My  argument  then  is,  if  it  was  wrong  to  en- 
slave the  negroes,  it  is  wrong  to  keep  them  in 
hopeless  bondage ;  and  it  follows  that,  after  this 
country  had  renounced  the  African  slave  trade, 
it  was  bound  by  the  very  principles  on  which  that 
wretched  traffic  was  repudiated,  to  have  taken 
measures  for  the  liberation  of  all  who  had  thus 
been  wickedly  reduced  to  a  state  of  captivity,  and 
long  before  this  time  to  have  converted  them  into 
a  free,  industrious,  a:id  happy  peasantry." 


FROM  THE  M.   E.  CHURCH. 


31 


"  Slavery  is  a  national  violence  and  theft — an  op- 
pressive, a  debasing,  a  relentless,  and  vnnurderous 
bondage." 

The  following  sentiment  was  expressed  by  Dr. 
Bunting,  President  of  the  Wesleyan  Conference, 
in  1836. 

"  Slavery  is  always  wrong — essentially,  eter- 
nally, and  INCURABLY  WRONG.  DIE  IT  MUST; 
and  happy  should  I  have  been,  had  they  [the  General 
Conference  of  the  M.  E.  Church]  PASSED  SEN- 
TENCE OF  DEATH  UPON  IT  !  " 

Such  has  been  Wesleyan  Methodism  from  the 
beginning;  and  such  was  American  Methodism 
once.    But  alas,  what  is  it  noiv ! 

The  following  is  from  an  Address  of  the  Wes- 
leyan Conference  to  the  M.  E.  Church,  put  forth 
in  1835 : 

"  Our  American  brethren  will  doubtless  allow 
us  the  fraternal  liberty  to  express  our  conviction 
that  GREAT  SCRIPTURAL  PRINCIPLES  are  op- 
posed to  the  continuance  of  slavery  in  a  Christian 
state;  that  the  permission  of  it  is  one  of  those 
deviations  from  natural  equity  and  evangelical 
purity  which  call  for  further  deviations  to  abet  and 
maintain  them  ;  that  it  is  contrary  to  the  precepts 
of  Christianity,  and  violates  and  counteracts  the 
principles  and  obligations  by  which  the  Gospel 
urges  those  precepts." 

In  1836  the  Wesleyan  Conference  sent  out  an- 
other address  to  the  M.  E.  Church,  from  which  I 
make  the  following  extract : 


32 


GROUNDS  OF  SECESSION 


"  Slavery  in  itself  is  so  obviously  opposed  to  the 
immutable  principles  of  justice,  to  the  inalienable 
rights  of  man  of  whatever  color  or  condition,  tc 
the  social  and  civil  improvement  and  happiness 
of  the  human  family,  to  the  principles  and  precepts 
of  Christianity,  and  to  the  full  accomplishment  ot 
the  merciful  designs  of  the  Gospel,  that  we  can- 
not but  consider  it  the  duty  of  the  Christian  church 
to  bear  an  unequivocal  testimony  against  a  system  which 
involves  so  much  sin  against  God,  and  so  much  op- 
pression and  wrong,  inflicted  on  an  unoffending 
race  of  our  fellow-men." 

The  pro-slavery  character  of  the  M.  E.  Church 
prevented  the  publication  of  either  of  the  address- 
es from  which  the  above  extracts  are  taken,  m 
any  of  the  church  papers.  A  motion  Avas  made 
by  the  writer,  on  the  floor  of  the  General  Confer- 
ence, to  have  these  addresses  published ;  but  it 
was  rejected.  Thus  our  Wesleyan  brethren  were 
treated  with  contempt. 


SECTION  II, 

rORMER    SEKTIMENTS    AND    USAGES    Or  THE  M.  E. 
CHURCH. 

The  M.  E.  Church  never  advocated  trie  doctrine 
of  immediate  abolition ;  but  then  we  liave  the 
clearest  evidence  that  she  was  formerly  strongly 
opposed  to  the  continuance  of  slavery  in  the  church 


FROM  THE  M.    E.  CHURCH. 


33 


or  in  the  couutiy — and  that  she  has  widely  de- 
parted from  her  former  strong  testimony  against 
slavery. 

The  first  two  bishops  of  the  M.  E.  Church  (Di. 
Coke  and  Francis  Asbiiry)  were  decided  anti- 
slavery  men.  They  kindled  up,  according  to  the 
testimony  of  Dr  Capers,  a  fire  in  the  South  which 
did  not  go  out  for  thirty  years.  Mr.  Asbury's 
Journal  is  full  of  his  opposition  to  slavery.  I  will 
give  a  few  specimens. 

"1772.  We  dined  with  Mr.  R.,  who  cannot 
keep  negroes  for  conscience's  sake,  and  this  was 
a  topic  of  our  conversation. 

"  1776.  After  preaching  at  the  Point,  I  met  the 
class  aivl  then  the  black  people,  some  of  whose 
unhappy  masters  forbid  their  coming  for  religious 
instruction.  How  will  the  sons  of  oppression 
answer  for  their  conduct  when  the  great  Proprie- 
tor of  all  shall  call  them  to  account. —  Vol.  1,  p. 
289. 

"1780.  Spoke  to  some  select  friends  about 
slave-keeping,  but  they  could  not  bear  it;  this  I 
know,  God  will  plead  the  cause  of  the  oppressed, 
though  it  gives  offence  to  say  so  here.  0  Lord, 
banish  the  infernal  spirit  of  sl.wery  from  thy 
dear  Zion. 

*'  1783.  We  all  agreed  (at  the  Virginia  Confer- 
ence) in  the  spirit  of  African  liberty,  and  strong 
testimonies  were  borne  in  its  favor  at  our  love- 
feast. — lb.  pp.  356. 

"  1785.    At  the  Virgmia  Conference  he  says. — 


34 


GROUNDS  OF  SECESSION 


I  found  the  minds  of  the  people  greatly  agitated 
with,  our  rules  against  slavery,  and  a  prepared  pe- 
tition to  the  general  assembly  for  the  emancipation 
of  the  blacks.  Colonel   and  Dr.  Coke  dis- 
puted on  the  subject,  and  the  Colonel  used  some 
threats  :  next  day  brother  O'Kelly  let  fly  at  them, 
and  they  were  made  angry  enough ;  Ave,  however, 
came  off  with  whole  bones. — lb.  p.  384. 

"  We  waited  on  General  Washington,  who  re- 
ceived us  very  politely,  and  gave  us  his  opinion 
against  slavery. — lb.  p.  385. 

"  1787.  Rode  to  brother  Johnson's — without 
the  labor  of  slaves,  he  manages  to  have  abund- 
ance for  man  and  beast. —  Vol.  2,  p.  11. 

"  1788.  Virginia.  Other  persuasions  are  less 
supine  ;  and  their  ministers  boldly  preach  against 
the  freedom  of  slaves.  Our  brother  Everett,  with 
no  less  zeal  and  boldness,  cries  aloud  for  liberty 
and  emancipLiLion. 

"Maryland.  Most  of  our  members  in  these 
parts  have  freed  their  slaves. — lb.  p.  39. 

"  1796.  We  reached  Charleston.  Here  are  the 
rich,  the  rice,  and  the  slaves.  The  last  is  awful 
to  me.  Wealthy  people  settled  on  the  rice  lands 
of  Cooper's  river,  hold  from  fifty  to  two  hundred 
slaves  on  a  plantation  in  chains  of  bojidage. — lb. 
p.  241. 

"My  spirit  was  grieved  at  the  conduct  of  some 
Methodists,  that  hire  out  slaves,  at  public  places, 
to  the  highest  bidder,  to  cut,  skin,  and  starve 
them.    I  think  such  members  ought  to  be  dealt 


FROM  TFIE  M.   E  CHURCH. 


35 


with.  On  the  side  of  the  oppressors  there  is 
law  and  power,  but  Avhere  is  justice  and 
mercy  to  the  poor  slaves  What  eye  will  pity, 
what  hand  will  help,  or  ear  listen  to  their  dis 
tresses  1  I  will  try  if  words  can  be  like  drawn 
swords  to  pierce  the  hearts  of  the  owners. — lb.  p 
273. 

"1798.  My  mind  is  much  pained.  01  to  be 
dependent  on  slaveholders  is  in  part  to  be  a  slave, 
and  I  was  free  born. 

"  On  Saturday,  I  had  a  close  conversation  with 
some  of  our  local  ministry.  We  are  happy  to  find 
seven  out  of  ten  were  not  in  the  spirit  or  practice 
of  slavery. 

"  I  assisted  Philip  Sands  to  draw  up  an  agree- 
ment for  our  officiary  to  sign  against  slavery.  Thus 
we  may  know  the  real  sentiments  of  our  local 
preachers.  It  appears  to  me  that  we  can  never 
fully  reform  the  people,  until  we  reform  the  preachers — 
and  that  hitherto  except  purging  the  traveUing 
connection,  we  have  been  working  at  the  wrong 
end.  But,  if  it  be  lawful  for  local  preachers  to 
hold  slaves,  then  it  is  lawful  for  travelling  preach- 
ers also ;  and  they  may  keep  plantations  and  over- 
seers upon  their  quarters  :  but  tliis  reproach  of  m- 
consistency  must  be  rolled  away. 

"1814  Georgia.  Awny  with  the  false 'cant, 
that  the  better  you  use  the  negroes,  the  worse 
they  will  use  you !  Make  them  good,  then — 
teach  them  the  fear  of  God,  and  learn  to  fear  Him 
yourselves,  ye  masters !    I  understand  not  the 


36 


GROUNDS  OF  SECESSION 


doctrine  of  cruelty.  As  soon  as  the  poor  Africans 
see  me  they  spring  with  life  to  the  boat,  and 
make  a  heavy  flat  skim  along  like  a  light  canoe  ; 
poor  starved  souls — God  will  judge  !" — lb.  p.  376. 

How  unlike  are  these  sentiments  to  the  doctrine 
of  Bishop  Hedding,  as  contained  in  the  following 
sentence : 

"  The  right  to  hold  a  slave  is  founded  on  this 
rule,  '  Therefore,  all  things  whatsoever  ye  would 
that  men  should  do  to  you,  do  ye  even  so  to 
them ;  for  this  is  the  law  and  the  prophets.' " — 
Ch.  Ad.  and  Journal,  Oct.  20,  1837. 

"  In  1780,  the  Conference  acknowledged  that  slavery 
is  contrary  TO  the«laws  of  God,  man  and  nature, 
and  hurtful  to  society ;  CONTRARY  TO  THE  DIC- 
TATES OF  CONSCIENCE  AND  PURE  RELI- 
GION;  and  doing  what  we  would  not  that  others  should 
do  unto  us;  and  they  pass  their  disapprobation  upon 
all  our  friends  who  keep  slaves,  and  they  advise  their 
freedom.'" 

In  Lee's  History  of  the  Methodists  we  are  told 
that  the  following  rules  were,  in  substance,  adopt- 
ed in  1784. 

"  We  view  it  as  contrary  to  the  golden  law  of 
God,  on  which  hangs  all  the  law  and  the  prophets,* 
and  the  unalienable  rights  of  mankind,  as  well  as 

•  la  it  not  wonderful,  that  the  very  precept  so  often  ap- 
pealed to  by  the  Fathers,  to  show  the  incompatibility  of 
davery  witli  Chistianity,  should  now  be  pleaded  by  Bishop 
Hedding  of  the  same  Church,  to  prove  the  "  right  to  hold  r 
slave  ?"    How  art  the  migMy  falUn  ? 


A 


FROM  THE  M.   E.  CHURCH. 


37 


every  principle  of  the  revolution,  to  hold  in  the 
deepest  debasement,  in  a  more  abject  slavery  than 
is  perhaps  to  be  found  in  any  part  of  the  world 
except  America,  so  many  souls  that  are  capable 
of  the  image  of  God.  We  therefore  think  it  our 
most  bouuden  duty  to  take  immediately  some  ef- 
fectual method  to  extirpate  this  abomination  from 
among  us  ;  and  for  that  purpose  we  add  the  fol- 
lowing to  the  rules  of  our  society,  viz ; 

"  Every  member  m  our  Society,  who  has  slaves, 
in  those  States  where  the  laws  will  admit  of  free- 
ing them,  shall,  after  notice  given  him  by  the 
preacher,  within  twelve  months  (except  in  Vir- 
giuia,  and  there  \\-ithin  two  years)  legally  execute 
and  record  an  instnmient,  whereby  he  sets  free 
every  slave  in  his  possession;  those  who  are  from 
forty  to  forty-five,  immediately,  or  at  farthest  at 
the  age  of  forty-five. 

*^  Those  who  are  between  the  ages  of  twenty- 
five  and  forty,  immediately,  or  within  the  course 
of  five  years.  Those  who  are  between  the  ages 
of  .twenty  and  twenty-five,  immediately,  or  at 
farthest  at  the  age  of  thirty.  Those  who  are  un- 
der the  age  of  twenty,  as  soon  as  they  are  twenty- 
five  at  farthest.  And  every  infant,  immediately 
on  its  birth. 

"Every  person  concerned,  who  will  not  comply 
with  these  rules,  shall  have  liberty  quietly  to  with- 
draw from  our  Society  within  the  twelve  months 
following  :  the  notice  being  given  iiim,  as  afore- 
said; otherwise  the  assistant  shall  exclude  him. 
2 


38  GROUNDS  OF  SECESSION 


"No  person  so  voluntarily  withdrawn,  oi  so 
excluded,  shall  ever  partake  of  the  supper  of  the 
Lord  with  the  Methodists,  till  he  complies  with 
the  above  requisitions. 

"  No  person  holding  slaves,  shall,  in  future,  be 
admitted  into  Society,  or  to  the  Lord's  Supper,  till 
he  previously  comply  with  these  rules,  concern 
ing  Slavery. 

"  Tliose  who  buy,  sell,  or  give  them  away,  unless  on 
purpose  to  free  them,  shall  be  expelled  immediately."  . 
The  very  next  year  (1785)  the  conference  said, — 
"  We  do  hold  in  the  deepest  abhorrence  the 

PRACTICE  OF  SLAVERY,   and  SHALL  NOT  CEASE  TO  SEEK 

its  DESTRUCTION,  by  all  wise  and  prudent 
means." 

In  1788  the  following  item  made  a  part  of  the 
General  Rules  : 

"  The  buyinq  or  selling  the  bodies  and  souls  of 
men,  women  or  children,  with  an  intention  to  en- 
slave them." — Bangs^  History  of  M.  E.  Church, 
Vol.  1.  p.  213. 

[In  the  year  1800  the  following  articles  on  sla- 
very made  a  part  of  the  M.  E.  Discipline.] 

"  OF  SLAVERY. 

"  Question..  What  regulation  shall  be  made  for 
the  extirpation  of  the  crying  evil  of  African  sla- 
very ■? 

"  Answer.  1 .  We  declare  that  weare  more  than 
ever  convinced  of  the  great  evil  of  African  slavery, 
which  still  exists  in  these  United  States,  and  do 


FROM  THE  M.  E.  CHURCH. 


39 


most  earnestly  recommend  to  the  Yearly  Confer- 
ences, Quarterly 'Meetings,  and  fo  those  who  have 
the  oversight  of  Districts  and  Circuits,  to  be  ex- 
ceedingly cautious  what  persons  they  admit  to 
official  stations  in  our  Church;  and  in  the  case  of 
future  admission  to  official  stations,  to  require 
such  security  of  those  who  hold  slaves,  for  the 
emancipation  of  them,  immediately,  or  gradually, 
as  the  laws  of  the  States  respectively,  and  the 
circumstances  of  the  case  Avill  admit ;  and  we  do 
fully  authorize  all  the  Yearly  Conferences  to  make 
whatever  regulation  they  judge  proper,  in  the 
present  case,  respecting  the  admission  of  persons 
to  official  stations  in  our  church. 

"  When  any  travelling  preacher  becomes  an 
owner  of  a  slave  or  slaves,  by  any  means,  he  shall 
forfeit  his  ministerial  character  in  our  church,  un- 
less he  executes,  if  it  be  practicable,  a  legal 
emancipation  of  such  slaves,  conformably  to  the 
laws  of  the  State  in  which  he  lives. 

" No  slaveholder  shall  be  received  hi  society, 
till  the  preacher  who  has  the  oversight  of  the 
Circuit,  shall  have  spoken  to  him  freely  and  faith- 
fully upon  the  subject  of  slavery. 

"  4.  ]<>ery  member  of  the  society,  who  sells 
a  slave,  shall  immediately,  after  full  proof,  be 
excluded  from  the  society,  and  if  any  membei 
of  our  society  purchase  a  slave,  the  ensuing 
Quarterly  Meeting  shall  determine  on  the  num- 
ber of  years  in  which  the  slave  so  purchased 
would  work  out  the  price  of  his  purchase. 
And  the  person  so  purchasmg,   shall  imme- 


40 


GROUNDS  OP  SECESSION 


diately  after  such  determination,  execute  a  le- 
gal instrument  for  the  manumission  of  such  slave, 
at  the  expiration  of  the  term  determined  by  the 
Quarterly  Meeting.  And  in  default  of  his  exe- 
cuting such  instrument  of  manumission,  or  on 
his  refusal  to  submit  his  case  to  the  judgment  of 
the  Quarterly  Meeting,  such  member  shall  be  excluded 
the  society.  Provided  also,  that  in  the  case  of  a 
female  slave,  it  shall  be  inserted  in  the  aforesaid 
instrument  of  manumission,  that  all  her  children 
who  shall  be  born  during  the  years  of  her  servi- 
tude, shall  be  free  at  the  following  times,  namely 
— every  female  child  at  the  age  of  twenty-one,  and 
every  male  child  at  the  age  of  twenty-five.  Never- 
theless, if  the  member  of  our  society  executing 
the  said  instrument  of  manumission,  judge  it 
proper,  he  may  fix  the  times  of  manumission  of 
the  female  slaves  before  mentioned,  at  an  earlier 
age  than  that  which  is  prescribed  above. 

"5.  The  preachers  and  other  members  of  our 
society,  are  requested  to  consider  the  subject  of 
negro  slavery  with  deep  attention ;  and  that  they 
impart  to  the  Gener?l  Conference,  through  the 
medium  of  the  Yearly  Conferences,  or  otherwise, 
any  important  thoughts  upon  the  subject,  that  the 
Conference  may  have  full  light,  in  order  to  take 
further  steps  towards  the  eradicating  this  "enor- 
mous evil  from  that  part  of  the  Church  of  God  to 
which  they  are  connected. 

"  6.  The  Annual  Conferences  are  directed  to 
draw  up  addresses  for  the  gradual  emancipation 


FROM  THE  M.  E.  CHURCH.  41 


of  the  slaves,  to  the  legislatures  of  those  States,  in 
which  no  general  laws  have  been  passed  for  that 
purpose.  These  addresses  shall  urge  in  the  most 
respectful,  but  pointed  manner,  the  necessity  of  a 
law  for  the  gradual  emancipation  of  the  slaves ; 
proper  Committees  shall  be  appointed,  by  the 
Annual  Conferences,  out  of  the  most  respectable 
of  our  friends,  for  the  conductiug  of  the  business; 
and  the  Presiding  Elders,  Eiders,  Deacons,  and 
Travelling  Preachers,  shall  procure  as  many  pro- 
per signatures  as  possible  to  the  addresses,  and 
give  all  the  assistance  in  their  power,  in  every 
respect,  to  aid  the  committees,  and  to  further  this 
blessed  undertaking.    Let  this  be  continued  from 

YEAR  TO  TEAR,  TILL  THE  DESIRED  END  BE  ACCOM- 
PLISHED." 

Such  were  the  regulations  entered  into  from 
time  to  time,  in  the  early  history  of  Methodism. 
And,  says  Mr.  Samuel  Davis,  a  member  of  the  M. 
E.  Church,  born  in  Maryland,  and  residing  there 
until  1826,  in  a  letter  to  Dr.  Fisk,  April  8,  1838, 

"  So  universally  were  those  rules  attended  to, 
that  I  never  knew  but  one  single  instance  of  any 
member's  neglecting  them ;  and  that  was  my  next 
neighbor,  at  whose  house  our  presiding  elder 
called,  in  the  year  1792,  on  business,  with  a 
preacher  who  was  then  stationed  there.  When  the 
presiding  elder  was  about  to  retire,  the  gentleman 
of  the  house  invited  him  to  stay  to  dinner,  saying, 
'it  was  almost  ready.'  The  reply  was, '  I  never  eat 
a  meal  in  a  Methodist  slaveholder's  house,  if  I 


42 


GROUNDS  OP  SECESSION 


know  it,'  and  he  immediately  left  him.  I  have 
heard  Bishop  Asbury,  and  many  of  the  early 
preachers,  preach  pointedly  against  slavery  At 
our  Quarterly  Meetinys,  where  hundreds  of  slave- 
holders were  present  with  their  slaves,  I  have  re- 
peatedly heard  some  of  our  preachers  condemn 
the  PRACTICE  of  slavery,  as  a  vile  sin  against  God, 
morally,  socially,  and  politically  WRONG,  no  one 
interrupting  or  molesting  the  man  of  God.  And 
I  have  no  doubt  had  all  our  ministers  done  their  duty, 
there  would  not  have  been  a  slave  left  in  this  country 
20  years  ago.  For  I  knoAV,  that  about  that  time  and 
a  few  years  previous,  there  were  hundreds  of 
slaves  set  free  by  the  members  of  the  Methodist 
E.  Church.  As  soon  as  T  became  twenty-one 
years  of  age,  T  liberated  the  slaves  I  inherited, 
those  over  twenty-one,  immediately,  and  those  un- 
der, as  soon  as  they  became  twenty-one  years 
of  age." 

Says  Rev.  Joseph  Everett,  a  distinguished  min- 
ister of  the  M.  E.  Church,  "  In  1787, 1  went  down 
to  Cape  Charles,  through  Northampton,  and  urged 
the  necessity  of  letting  the  oppressed  go  free;  for 
which  I  was  almost  obliged  to  run  the  gauntlet. 
I  believe  when  the  Lord  first  sent  the  Methodists 
into  America  to  preach  the  gospel,  many  got  con- 
verted who  held  slaves ;  and  all  that  continued 
faithful,  after  some  time,  the  Lord  convinced  them 
it  was  wrong  to  keep  them;  and  all  who  rejected 
conviction,  lost  their  right  to  the  favor  of  God 
But  at  this  time,  I  fear  all  who  hold  their  slaves. 


FROM  THE  M.  E.  CHURCH. 


43 


may  go  to  hear  the  gospel  preached  all  their  days, 
but  if  they  do  not  give  up  their  oppressive  man- 
ner of  living,  the  word  of  God  will  be  a  savor  of 
death  unto  their  souls,  and  that  they  will  die  in 
their  sins  and  m  their  blood,  and  will  be  damned 
for  their  wickedness." 

The  manner  in  which  the  power  of  the  gospel 
wrought  upon  the  slaveholder  is  strikingly  illus- 
trated in  the  life  of  Rev.  Freeborn  Garrettson,  the 
companion  of  Asburt,  and  all  the  first  generation 
of  Methodists.  In  his  life,  compiled  by  Rev.  N. 
Bangs,  pp.  33,  34,  35,  we  have  the  following,  viz: 
— "  I  arose  from  the  earth,  and  advancing  towards 
the  house  in  deep  thought,  I  came  to  this  conclu- 
sion, that  I  would  exclude  myself  from  the  society 
of  men,  and  live  in  a  cell  upon  bread  and  water, 
mourning  out  my  days  for  having  grieved  my 
Lord.  ■  I  went  into  my  room  and  sat  in  one  posi- 
tion till  mne  o'clock.  "  I  then  threw  myself  on  the 
bed,  and  slept  till  morning.  Although  it  was  the 
Lord's  day  I  did  not  hitend  to  go  to  any  place  of 
worship;  neither  did  I  desire  to  see  any  person, 
but  wished  to  pass  my  time  away  in  total  solitude. 
I  continued  reading  the  Bible  till  eight,  and  then 
mider  a  sense  of  duty,  called  the  family  together 
for  prayer.  As  I  stood  with  a  book  in  my  hand, 
in  the  act  of  giving  out  a  hymn,  this  thought 
powerfully  struck  my  mind  •  '  It  is  not  right  for 
you  to  keep  your  fellow-creatures  in  bondage ; 
you  must  let  the  oppressed  go  free.  I  knew  it 
was  that  same  blessed  voice  which  had  spoken 


44 


GKOUNDS  OF  SECESSION 


to  me  before — till  then,  I  had  never  suspected 
that  the  practice  of  slave-keeping  was  wrong  :  I 
had  not  read  a  book  on  the  subject,  nor  been 
told  by  any — I  paused  a  minute,  and  then  replied, 
'Lord,  the  oppressed  shall  go  free.'  And  I  was 
as  clear  of  them  in  my  mind,  as  if  I  had  never 
owned  one.  I  told  them  they  did  not  belong  to 
me,  and  that  I  did  not  desire  their  services  with- 
out making  them  a  compensation :  I  Avas  noAV  at 
liberty  to  proceed  in  worship.  After  singing  I 
kneeled  to  pray.  Had  I  the  tongue  of  an  angel, 
I  could  not  fully  describe  what  I  felt :  all  my  de- 
jection, and  that  melancholy  gloom  which  preyed 
upon  me,  vanished  in  a  moment,  a  divine  sweet- 
ness ran  through  my  whole  frame.  It  was  God, 
not  man,  that  taught  me  the  impropriety  of  hold- 
ing slaves :  and  I  shall  never  be  able  to  praise 
him  enough  for  it.  My  very  heart  has  bled,  since 
that,  for  slaveholders,  especially  those  who  make 
a  profession  of  religion,  for  I  believe  it  to  be  a 
crying  sin." 


SECTION  III. 

THE  M.  E.  CHURCH  PRO-SLAVERY. 

The  M.  E.  Church  has  evidently  been  progress- 
ing backwards  from  the  year  1800,  though  the  first 
retrogade  step  was  taken  in  1792,  in  the  alteration 
which  then  took  place  in  the  General  Rule,  leav- 


PROM  THE  M.  E.  CHURCH. 


45 


ing  out  the  words  "bodies  and  souls,"  &c.,  as -will 
be  seen  from  what  follows . 

Rev.  Robert  Emory  in  his  history  of  the  Disci- 
pline, informs  us  that  he  finds  the  following  in 

1789.  "  The  buying  or  selling  the  bodies  and 
souls  of  men,  women  or  children,  with  an  inten- 
tion to  enslave  them." 

1792.  It  reads,  "  The  buying  or  selling  of  men, 
women  or  children,  with  an  intention  to  enslave 
them." 

1808.  It  reads,  "  The  buying  and  selling  of  men, 
women  and  children,"  &c.  For  this  alteration  no 
authority  is  found  in  the  journal  of  the  General  Con- 
ference. 

An  important  admission,  this  !  If  and  was  put 
in  the  place  of  or  by  mistake,  which  is  hardly 
possible,  how  is  the  leaving  out  of  bodies  and 
scuts  in  the  original  rule,  to  be  accounted  for  ? 
Let  the  friends  of  the  church  account  for  these 
changes  as  they  may ;  we  have  positive  proof 
before  our  eyes,  that  the  rule  has  been  changed 
twice  since  the  church  was  organised  :  and  this 
rule  being  a  part  of  the  constitution  of  the  church, 
the  constitution  of  the  church  has  been  changed 
twice. 

And  the  following,  from  a  letter  published  in  the 
Pittsburg  Christian  Advocate,  by  Rev.  Mr.  Drum- 
mond,  is  not  less  important. 

"  If  we  take  the  action  of  the  General  Confer- 
ence, as  a  true  index  of  the  anti-slavery  feeling 
and  zeal  of  the  church,  I  think  it  is  apparent,  that 


GROUNDS  OP  SECESSION' 


these  have  been  considerably  diminished  since 
the  year  1800." 

Now  I  would  inquire,  what  becomes  of  the 
Declaration  of  the  Bishops,  made  in  their  address 
to  the  late  General  Conference,  that  the  "  general 
rule  on  slavery"  "  has  stood  from  the  beginning  un- 
changed ?" 

These  changes  have  greatly  altered  the  charac- 
ter of  the  rule.  The  original  rule  made  tlie  crime 
of  slave-trading  in  the  M.  E.  Church  what  the 
spirit  of  inspiration  made  it  in  mystic  Babylon — 
trading  in  souls  of  men.  When  the  change  was 
made  from  bodies  and  souls  of  men,  women  and 
children,  to  men,  women  or  children,  the  idea  of  sell- 
ing and  buying  the  immortal  part  was  not  so  clear- 
ly expressed,  and  the  Babylonish  character  of  the 
church  was  not  so  fully  and  clearly  acknowl- 
edged. Here  was  a  gain  on  the  part  of  slavery. 
Though  buying  men,  women  or  children  was 
buying  the  bodies  and  souls  of  these  persons,  the 
language  was  smoothed  down,  and  no  longer  cal- 
culated to  shock  the  moral  feelings  so  violently. 
But  when  and  was  substituted  for  or,  the  whole 
meaning  of  the  rule  became  changed.  Previous 
to 'this,  the  buying  or  selling  a  man,  woman  or 
child — any  human  being — was  a  violation  of  the 
rule,  but  not  so  now.  It  takes  six  things  to  vio- 
late the  rule  as  it  now  stands.  1.  Buying  a  man 
(Or  men).  2.  Buying  a  woman  (or  women).  3. 
Buying  a  child  (or  children).  4.  Selling  a  matt 
(or  men).    5.  Selling  a  woman  (or  women).  6. 


FROM  THE  M.  E.  CHURCH. 


47 


Selling  a  child  (or  children).  Mark,  it  is  the  buy- 
ing AND  selling  all  these  persons  which  it  forbids, 
not  buying  or  selUng  any  one  class  of  them,  or 
any  one  of  either  class,  nor  yet  buying  and  sell- 
ing any  one  class,  or  any  one  of  either  class,  but 
buying  and  setling  at  least,  one  of  each  class. 

In  1804,  the  paragraphs  about  considering  the 
subject,  and  petitions  to  the  legislatures  (namely, 
No.  4  of  1796,  and  No.  6,  of  1800)  were  striken  out. 

1808.  Paragraphs  2  and  3  of  1796  were  struck 
out,  and  the  following  substituted. 

"3.  The  General  Conference  authorizes  each 
annual  conference  to  form  their  own  regulations 
relative  to  buying  and  selling  slaves." 

This  was  stricken  out  iu  1820,  and  the  last  tluree 
paragraphs  of  the  section  on  slavery,  p.  196  of 
Dis.,  were  added. 

And  yet  the  Western  Christian  Advocate,,  of  De- 
cember 8th,  1837,  says,  "  our  readers  should  know 
that  our  church  has  neither  given  up  nor  modified  any 
of  her  strong  Scriptural  doctrines,  OR  REGULATIONS, 
on  the  subject  of  slavery  .''^  And  Dr.  Bangs  in  the  Chris- 
tian Advocate,  of  January  29,  1833,  said,  the  Me- 
thodist Episcopal  Church  "  has  always  held  one 
undeviating  language  in  opposition  to  slavery. One 
of  two  conclusions  must  be  come  to  :  Drs.  Elliot 
and  Bangs  are  either  ignorant  of  the  history  of 
their  church's  connection  with  slavery,  or  are  dis- 
honest enough  to  practice  deception  on  their  rea- 
ders, by  affirming  what  they  know  is  not  true. 

From  1820  to  1835,  the  church  appears  to  have 


48 


GROUNDS  OP  SECESSION 


been  in  a  profound  sleep  ;  and  when  she  awoke 
it  was  only  to  oppose  all  anti-slavery  measures. 
Coke  and  Asbury  were  dead,  and  the  old  Methodist 
preachers  had  learned  better  than  to  preach 
against  slavery. 

The  church  since  1820  has  borne  no  testimony 
against  slavery,  except  what  is  contained  in  the 
mutilated  general  rule ;  and  even  this  is  admitted 
to  be  a  dead  letter  in  the  South.  The  section  on 
slavery  in  the  latter  part  of  the  Discipline  many- 
Episcopal  Methodists  contend  is  not  in  opposition, 
but  in  favor  of  slavery.  • 

In  the  latter  end  of  the  year  1834,  a  number  of 
ministers,  members  of  the  New  England  and  New 
Hampshire  Conferences,  addressed  their  brethren 
in  the  ministry  of  these  two  conferences,  in  an 
able  Ajipeal,  Avhich  was  published  the  forepart  of 
Jan.  1835,  in  Zion's  Herald  Extra.  This  drew 
forth  a  long  reply  called  the  "  Counter  Appeal,' ' 
signed  by  W.  Fisk,  D.  D.  Whedon,  John  Lindsey 
Jacob  Sanborn,  H.  H.  White,  H.  S.  Ramsdell,  Abel 
Stevens,  and  I  believe  one  other.  This  document 
was  judged  to  contain pi;o-slavery  sentiments,  and 
it  was  critically  examined  by  the  authors  of  the 
Appeal,  April  22,  1835.  About  the  time  the  first 
Appeal  was  written,  and  before  it  was  published, 
another  member  of  the  New  England  Conference 
commenced  a  series  of  essays  in  Zion's  Herald  on 
the  subject  of  slavery.  The  whole  subject'  of 
slavery  and  abolition  was  discussed  in  Zion's 
Herald  for  several  months,  by  0.  Scott  and  others 


FROM  THE  M.  E.  CHURCH. 


49 


on  one  side,  and  W.  Fisk  and  D.  D.  Whedon  on 
the  other :  and  so  rapidly  did  anti-slavery  senti- 
ments spread  and  prevail,  that  within  six  months, 
a  majority  of  the  New  England  and  New  Hamp- 
shire Conferences  Avere  converted  to  the  doctrine 
of  immediate  abolition;  and  in  June,  1S35,  an 
anti-slavery  delegation  from  both  conferences  was 
secured  to  the  General  Conference,  with  the  ex- 
ception of  a  single  delegate  ! 

The  General  Conference  assembled  at  Cincin- 
nati the  ensuing  May.  It  consisted  of  about  150 
members.  All  except  seventeen  were  either  slave- 
holders or  auti-abolitionists.  Of  these  seventeen, 
nine  were  from  New  Hampshire,  six  from  New 
England,  one  from  Maine,  and  one  from  Pittsburg. 

At  this  Conference,  commenced  what  may  be 
emphatically  termed  the  modern  pro-slavery  mea- 
sures of  the  M.  E.  Church;  or  in  other  words, 
'■  the  reign  of  terror !" 

We  will  glance  at  some  of  the  pro-slavery  mea- 
sures adopted  at  the  General  Conference  of  1836 ! 

An  Anti-Slavery  Society  had  been  formed  in 
Cincinnati  a  year  or  two  before.  A  meeting  of 
the  society  was  appointed  for  the  evening  of  the 
10th  of  May,  to  which  the  abolitionists  attending 
the  conference  as  delegates,  were  invited.  Of 
those  who  attended,  two  of  them  made  remarks 
suited  to  the  occasion.  On  the  12th  of  May,  Rev. 
S.  G.  Roszell  presented  to  the  conference  the  fol- 
io wmg  preamble  and  resolntions  ; — 

"  Whereas,  great  excitement  has  pervaded  this 


50 


GROUNDS  OF  SECESSION 


country  on  the  suhject  of  modern  abolitionism, 
which  is  reported  to  have  been  increased  in  this 
city  by  the  unjustifiable  conduct  of  two  members 
of  the  General  Conference,  in  lecturing  upon,  and 
in  favor  of,  that  agitating  topic;  and,  whereas,  such 
a  course  on  the  part  of  any  of  its  members  is 
calculated  to  bring  upon  this  body  the  suspicion 
and  distrust  of  the  community,  and  misrepresent 
its  sentiments  in  regard  to  the  point  at  issue ;  and, 
whereas,  in  this  aspect  of  the  case,  a  due  regard 
for  its  own  character,  as  well  as  a  just  concern 
for  the  interest  of  the  church  confided  to  its  care, 
demand  a  full,  decided  and  unequivocal  expres- 
sion of  the  views  of  the  General  Conference  in 
the  premises — Therefore, 

"  1.  Resolved, — By  the  delegates  of  the  annual 
Conferences  in  General  Conference  assembled 
that  they  disapprove  in  the  most  unqualified  sense, 
the  conduct  of  the  two  members  of  the  General 
Conference,  Avho  are  reported  to  have  lectured  in 
this  city  recentjy,  upon,  and  in  favor  of,  modern 
abolitionism." 

"2.  Resolved, — by  the  delegates  of  the  Annual 
Conferences  in  General  Conference  assembled, 
that  they  are  decidedly  opposed  to  modern  aboli- 
tionism, and  wholly  disclaim  any  right,  wish,  or 
intention,  to  interfere  in  the  civil,  and  political  re- 
lation between  master  and  slave,  as  it  exists  in 
the  slave-holding  states  of  this  Union." 

The  preamble  and  resolutions  were  adopted— 


FROM  THE  M.  E.  CHURCH. 


51 


the  first  resolution  by  122  to  11,  the  last  by  120 
to  14. 

A  member  of  the  General  Conference  moved  to 
amend  the  last  resolution  by  incorporating  a  sen- 
timent of  the  Discipline  on  this  wise  :  that  though 
"  we  are  as  much  as  ever  convinced  of  the  great 
evil  of  slavery/'  yet  we  are  decidedly  opposed  to 
modern  abolitionism,  &c.  This  amendment  was 
in  the  very  language  of  the  'Discipline ;  and 
though  the  very  sentence  which  would  have  con- 
tained it,  would  have  condemned  abolitionism, 
yet  such  was  the  pro-slavery  character  of  the 
General  Conference,  that  they  would  not  say,  as 
the  Discipline  had  always  said,  that  slavery  was 
an  "  evil." 

They  refused  to  publish  the  address  of  the  Eng- 
lish VVesleyan  Conference,  because  it  alluded  to 
slavery ;  and  in  a  Pastoral  Address  to  the  M.  E. 
Church,  this  Conference  exhoi'ted  Methodists  to 
abstain  from  all  "  abolition  movements  and  asso- 
ciations, and  to  refrain  from  patronizing  any  of 
tlieir  publications,  &c. 

They  further  said  :  "  From  every  view  of  the 
subject  which  we  have  been  able  to  take,  and 
from  the  most  calm  and  dispassionate  survey  of 
the  whole  ground,  we  have  come  to  the  conclu- 
sion that  the  only  safe,  scriptural,  and  prudent  way 
for  us,  both  as  ministers  and  people  to  take,  is, 
WHOLLY  TO  REFRAIN  from  this  agitating  sub- 
ject,"  &c. 


52 


GROUNDS  OF  SECESSION 


The  Ohio  Annual  Conference,  had  a  short  time 
before, 

"1.  Resolved,  That  we  deeply  regret  the  pro- 
ceedings of  the  abolitionists,  and  anti-slavery 
societies  in  the  free  States,  and  the  consequent 
excitement  produced  thereby  in  the  slave  states; 
that  Ave,  as  a  Conference,  disclaim  all  connection 
and  co-operation  with,  or  belief  in  the  same;  and 
that  we  hereby  recommend  to  our  junior  preach- 
ers, local  brethren,  and  private  members  within 
our  bounds,  to  abstain  from  any  connection  with 
them,  or  participation  of  their  acts  in  the  premises 
whatever." 

"2.  Resolved,  That  those  brethren  and  citizens 
of  the  North,  who  resist  the  abolition  movements 
with  firmness  and  moderation,  are  the  true  friends 
to  the  church,  to  the  slaves  of  the  South,  and  to 
the  constitution  of  our  common  country,"  &c. 

The  New  Y ork  Annual  Conference  met  in  June 
1836,  and 

1.  Resolved,  That  this  Conference  fully  con- 
cur in  the  advice  of  the  late  General  Conference, 
as  expressed  in  their  Pastoral  Address." 

"  2.  Resolved,  That  we  disapprove  of  the  mem- 
bers of  this  Conference  patronizing,  or  in  any  way 
giving  countenance  to  a  paper  called  '  Zion's 
Watchman,'  because,  in  our  opinion,  it  tends  to 
disturb  the  peace  and  harmony  of  the  body,  by 
sowing  dissensions  in  the  church." 

"3   Resolved,  That  although  we  could  not 


FROM  THE  M.  E.  CHURCH. 


53 


condemn  any  man,  or  withhold  our  suffrages  from 
him  on  account  of  his  opinions  merely  in  reference 
to  abolitionism,  3'et  we  are  decidedly  of  the  opin- 
ion that  none  ought  to  be  elected  to  the  office  of  a 
deacon,  or  elder,  in  our  chnrch,  unless  he  give  a 
pledge  to  the  Conference,  that  he  will  refrain  from 
agitating  the  church  with  discussions  on  this  sub- 
ject, and  the  more  especially  as  the  one  promises 
'  reverently  to  obey  them  to  whom  the  charge  and 
government  over  him  is  committed,  following 
with  a  glad  mind  and  will  their  godly  admoni 
tions  :'  and  the  other  with  equal  solemnity  prom- 
ises, to  'maintain  and  set  forward,  as  much  as 
lieth  in  him,  quietness,  peace  and  love  among  all 
Christian  people,  and  especially  among  them  that 
are,  or  shall  be  committed  to  his  charge.'" 

In  1838,  the  same  Conference 

"  Resolved,  As  the  sense  of  this  Conference, 
that  any  of  its  members,  or  probationers,  who 
shall  patronize  Zion's  Watchman,  either  by  writ- 
ing in  commendation  of  its  character,  by  circu- 
lating it,  recommending  it  to  our  people,  or  pro- 
curing subscribers,  or  by  collecting  or  remitting 
monies,  shall  be  deemed  guilty  of  indiscretion, 
and  dealt  with  accordingly." 

Under  this  rule,  several  members  of  that  Confer- 
ence were  tried  and  suspended. 

In  the  year  1837,  the  Baltimore  Conference 
passed  the  following  resolution  : 

"  That  in  all  cases  of  administration  under  the 
general  rule,  in  reference  to  buying  and  selling  men. 


54 


GROUNDS  OP  SECESSION 


women  and  children,  &c.,  it  be  and  hereby  is  re- 
commended to  all  committees,  as  the  sense  of  this 
Conference,  that  said  rnle  be  taken,  construed  and 
understood,  so  as  not  to  make  the  guilt  or  innczence  of 
the  accused  to  depend  upon  the  simple  fact  of  pur- 
chase or  SALE  of  any  such  slave  or  slaves,  hnt  upon 
the  attendant  circumstances  of  cruelty,  injustice,  or  in- 
humanity on  the  one  hand,  or  those  of  kind  pur- 
poses or  good  intentions,  on  the  other,  nnder  which 
the  transactions  shall  have  been  perpetrated ;  and 
further,  it  is  recommended  that,  in  all  such  cases, 
the  charge  be  brought  for  immorality,  and  the  cir- 
cumstances be  adduced  as  specifications  under  that 
charge." 

This  resolution  takes  the  ground  openly,  that 
slaves  maybe  bought  and  sold  without  guilt;  and 
hot  only  so,  but  with  kind  purposes  and  good 
intentions.  The  guilt  or  innocence  does  not,  in  the 
judgment  of  the  Baltimore  Conference,  depend  on 
"  the  simple  fact  of  purchase  or  sale,"  (mark  this,) 
but  on  the  circumstances ;  hence  the  charge  is  not 
to  be  brought  for  the  violation  of  the  "  rule,"  but 
for  immorality ;  and  the  fact  that  a  slave  was 
bought  or  sold,  is  not  to  be  brought  as  a  specifica- 
tion to  sustain  the  charge  of  immorality,  but  the 
circumstances.  Then  there  are  circumstances  in 
which  it  would  be  right,  kind,  and  good,  to  sell  or 
buy  slaves,  and  in  which  it  would  be  wrong,  eruel 
and  unjust,  so  to  do.  The  circumstances  are  to 
make  out  the  guilt  in  a  case  of  administration 
under  this  rule,  "  the  general  rule,"  not  the  fact 


FROM   niE  M.   E.   CHURCH.  55 

of  sale  or  purchase,  hence  the  rule  does  not  forbid 
sale  or  purchase. 

The  General  Conference  of  1840  approved  of 
the  journals  of  the  Baltimore  Conference  with  this 
resolution  in  them — approved  of  them',  this  reso- 
lution and  all ;  consequently  approved  of  it,  and 
thus  made  it  their  own ;  hence  the  doctrine  of  the 
Baltimore  Conference,  that  the  "general  rule"'  is 
not  to  "be  taken,  construed,  or  understood,"  so  as 
to  convict  a  person  of  guilt,  &c.,  for  the  simple  "pwr- 
chaie  or  sale"''  of  slaves,  is  the  doctrine  of  the  Gen- 
eral Conference — the  doctrine  of  the  whole  church. 

The  Georgia  Conference,  in  1837,  passed  the 
following  resolutions,  it  is  said  unanimomhj: — 

"  Whereas  there  is  a  clause  in  the  Discipline  of 
our  Church  which  states  that  we  are  as  much  as 
ever  convinced  of  the  great  evil  of  slaverij ;  and 
whereas  the  said  clause  has  been  perverted  by- 
some,  and  used  in  such  a  manner  as  to  produce 
the  impression  that  the  Methodist  Episcopal 
Church  believed  slavery  to  be  a  moral  evil, 

"  Therefore,  Resolved,  That  it  is  the  sense  of  the 
Georgia  Annual  Conference,  that  slavery,  as  it 
exists  in  the  United  States,  is  not  a  moral  evil. 

"  Resolved.  That  we  view  slavery  as  a  civil  and 
domestic  institution,  and  one  with  which,  as 
ministers  of  Christ,  we  have  nothing  to  do,  fur- 
ther than  to  ameliorate  the  condition  of  the  slave, 
by  endeavoring  to  impart  to  him  and  his  master 
the  benign  influences  of  the  religion  of  Christ,  and 
aiding  both  on  their  way  to  heaven. 


56 


GROUNDS  OP  SECESSION 


"  On  motion,  it  was  Resolved,  unanimously,  That 
the  Georgia  Annual  Conference  regard  with  feel- 
ings of  profound  respect  and  approbation  the  dig- 
nified course  pursued  by  our  several  superintend- 
ents or  bishops  in  suppressing  the  attempts  that 
have  been  made  by  various  individuals  to  get  up 
and  protract  an  excitement  in  the  churches  and 
country  on  the  subject  of  abolitionism. 

"  Resolved,  further,  That  they  shall  have  our  cor- 
dial and  zealous  support  in  sustaining  them  in  the 
ground  they  have  taken. — [Extract  from  the  Min- 
utes.] 

"  Thomas  C.  Benning,  Secretary.^' 
On  the  above  resolutions  the  Christian  Guardian, 

a  Methodist  paper  published  in  Canada,  made  tlie 

following  sensible  remarks  : 

"  Alas  !  Alas  !  '  You  that  have  tears,  prepare  to  shed 

them  now.'' 

"  Sainted  spirit  of  the  venerable  Wesley !  Could 
shame  and  anger  disturb  thy  deep  and  holy  tran- 
quillity, this  would  call  them  into  exercise !  If 
for  aught  thou  couldst  wish  to  revisit  this  '  world 
of  grief  and  sin,'  it  would  surely  be  to  erase  from 
the  records  of  Methodism  so  foul  a  blot  upon  the 
character  of  the  system  which  claims  thee  as  its 
founder;  or  to  inscribe  beneath  it,  in  emblazoned 
capitals,  thy  firm  protest.  Gladly  wouldst  thou, 
with  Heaven's  permission,  have  recorded,  in  a 
'hand-writing  upon  the  wall'  of  that  conference 
room,  thy  unchanged  belief  of  the  true  character 
of '  American  Slavery,  the  vilest  that  ever  saw  tlie 


FRQ.M  THE  M.   E.   CHURCH.  57 


s«n.'  Bai '■  if  they  hear  not  Moses  and  the  prophets 
neither  will  they  he  persuaded,  though  one  rose  from  the 
dead:" 

On  tlie  18th  of  January,  1838,  Dr.  Capers  intro- 
duced into  the  South  Carolina  Conference,  a  simi- 
lar resokition ;  containing  the  sentiment  that  slave- 
ly  is  not  a  moral  evil.  It  passed  by  a  large  vote— 
naanimous,  I  believe. 

The  General  Conference  has  sanctioned  both 
these  resolutions,  and  passed  them  both,  to  all  in- 
tents and  purposes,  by  its  act  of  approving  the 
Journals.  That  body  approved  them  both,  by  a 
direct  vote :  hence  these  resolutions  have  become 
the  resolutions  of  the  whole  church  ! 

The  Discipline  requires  (see  p.  25)  that  the  joiu*- 
nals  containing  tha  proceedings  of  each  Annual 
Conference  be  sent  to  the  General  Conference. 
The  General  Conference  appoints  a  committee  of 
one  from  each  Annual  Conference,  to  whom  all 
the  Annual  Conference  journals  are  referred  for 
examination,  and,  if  any  thing  be  found  anti- 
Methodistic,  to  report  the  same  to  the  General 
Conference,  to  be  censured  or  disposed  of  as  that 
body  may  determine.  The  General  Conference 
of  1840  had  the  journals  of  these  conferences  be- 
fore them,  as  also  those  of  the  other  Annual  Con- 
ferences. This  committee  made  a  report  dated 
June  1,  1840,  in  which  the  New  Hampshire,  New 
England,  and  Oneida  Conferences  were  censured 
by  name,  and  some  others  without  naming  them; 
but  no  complaint  was  whispered  against  the  Gcor- 


58 


GROUNDS  OF  SECESSION 


gia  or  South  Carolina  Conferences.  While  this 
report  was  under  consideration,  Rev.  J.  Dodge 
offered  an  amendment  to  the  preamble,  condemna- 
tory of  the  Georgia  resolution.  He  thought  that, 
as  the  action  of  several  conferences  had  received 
animadversion,  impartiality  required  that  there 
should  be  uniformity  of  treatment.  He  therefore 
moved  to  amend  the  report  by  adding,  '  Tlie  action 
of  the  Georgia  Conference,  in  declaring  that 
slavery,  as  it  exists  in  these  United  States,  is  not 
a  moral  evil,  contradicts  the  sense  of  the  general 
rule  and  ihe  tenth  section  of  the  Discipline  on  the 
subject,  and  is  therefore  irregular.' " 

This  amendment  was  laid  on  the  table,  and  the 
report  of  the  committees  approving  of  the  acts 
and  doings  of  the  Georgia  and  South  Carolina 
Conferences  adopted  by  a  direct  vote.  The  jour- 
nals of  the  Georgia  Conference  were  approved  by 
the  General  Conference,  in  full  view  of  this  reso- 
lution ;  for  Br.  Dodge  asked  the  Conference,  to 
say  that  it  was  "  irregular,"  and  they  would  not 
do  even  that  much.  The  General  Conference 
approved  of  this  resolution ;  for  they  approved 
the  journals,  of  which  it  was  a  part — the  whole 
journals,  without  exception — and  to  approve 
of  the  whole  is  to  approve  of  all  the  parts; 
for  the  whole  contains  all  the  parts.  The  Con- 
ference was  asked  to  except  to  this  part,  and 
would  not.  This  makes  the  case  still  strojiger. 
And  what  is  true  of  the  Georgia  Conference  is 
also  true  of  that  of  South  Carolina,  and  of  the 


FROM  THE  M.  E.  CHURCH. 


59 


Baltimore  Conferences,  in  the  case  we  have  no- 
ticed of  buying  and  selUng  slaves.  The  General 
Conference  has  said  jmt  what  these  Conferences 
said,  by  approving  and  adopting  what  they  said. 
The  General  Conference  did  say,  in  this  case,  that 
slavery,  as  it  exists,  not  in  the  M.  E.  church,  but 
in  the  United  States,  is  not  a  moral  evil ;  and  when 
the  General  Conference  said  it,  the  M.  E.  Church 
said  it ;  for  that  Conference  is  the  mouth  of  the 
church.  This,  all  this,  is  as  clear  as  demonstration 
can  make  any  .thing. 

"  Not  a  riioral  evil  !"  In  1780,  slavery  was 
"  contrary  to  the  laws  of  God,  man,  and  nature  ;  now, 
"  not  a  moral  evil !"  In  1784,  it  was  a  "  crymg 
evil,"  and  any  member  in  any  part  of  the  country, 
who  "  sold  a  slave,''  was  to  be  "  immediately  ex- 
pelled ;"  now,  "  not  a  moral  evil !"  In  1785,  it 
was  held  in  the  "  deepest  abhorrence ,-"  in  1837,  "not 
a  moral  evil !"  It  was  still  a  crying  evil  in  1801 ; 
and  expulsion  was  the  penalty  for  selling  a  slave; 
but,  in  1836,  the  General  Conference  condemned 
abolition,  bnt  refused  to  condemn  slavery:  there- 
fore, in  1837,  an  Annual  Conference  says  thac 
slavery  "  is  not  a  moral  evil !"  Can  you,  brethren, 
believe  the  Georgia  and  Baltimore  Conferences 
Avould  ever  have  taken  the  ground  they  have,  had 
it  not  been  for  the  doings  of  the  General  Confer- 
ence ■?  Can  you  see  how  a  Methodist  Bishop 
could  possibly  put  such  resolutions  to  vote,  if  a 
Bishop  has  a  right  in  any  case  to  decline  such 
business  ?    Was  that  "  disciplinary  business  V 


6a 


GROUNDS  OF  SECRSSION 


"proper  conference  business?"  In  view  of  all 
these  facts,  can  you  doubt  that  the  influence  of 
the  M.  E.  Church  is  in  favor  of  slavery  1  For  all 
this  prostration  of  discipline,  the  General  Confer- 
ence laiu  tbe  foundation ! 

But  to  see  a  body  of  professed  ministers  of 
Christ  call  that  sum  of  all  villainies  (American, 
slavery),  a  "  civil  and  domestic  institution  1"  How 
civil  to  rob  lutman  beings  of  all  their  rights — to 
enslave  the  image  of  God — to  steal  and  enslave 
innocent  children !  If  this  is  a  civil  institution,  I 
hardly  know  where  we  should  go  to  find  a  crimi- 
nal institution !  All  this  passes  unreproved  by  the 
official  organs  of  the  church ! 

And  now  I  ask,  has  not  the  spirit  as  well  as  the 
practice  of  slavery  increased  in  the  M.  E.  Church 
j'or  the  last  fifty  years  ?  I  can  no  more  doubt  this, 
than  I  can  doubt  my  existence.  If  any  proposi- 
tion can  be  established  by  facts,  this  can  be. 

And  is  it  not  equally  certahi,  that  the  influence 
of  the  M.  E.  Church  has  been  for  some  time  past  in 
favor  of  slavery  ?  I  cannot  resist  this  conviction. 
I  am  morally  certain  that  the  M.  E.  Church  is  at 
this  time  one  of  the  "  great  props"  of  slavery-.  A 
slaveholding  ministry  !  A  slaveholding  church! 
What  inconsistency  !  Do  not  many  ministers  and 
^lembers  give  their  influence  and  example  to  what 
the  Bible  calls,  and  Mr.  Wesley  considers,  man- 
stealing  ? 

Are  there  not  Achan's  in  the  church,  a  thousand 
times  worse  than  Achan  of  old  ?    lie  robbed  God 


FROM  Ti'IK   M.  E.   CIIUKCH.  61 


iu  temporal  things  :  she  has  robbed  him  of  his 
own  image.'  She  has  stolen,  not  a  wedge  of  gold, 
a  Babylonish  garment,  and  a  few  hundred  shekels 
of  silver,  but  she  has  stolen  human  beings,  and 
made  mcrchanckize  of  immortal  spirits !  It  appears 
to  me  that  the  language  of  the  Prophet  Ezekiel  to 
ancient  Tyre,  is  as  applicable  to  the  M.  E.  Church 
as  it  was  to  lier. 

"  Thou  hast  defiled  thy  sanctuaries  by  the  mul- 
titude of  thine  iniquities,  by  the  iniquity  of  thy 
TRAFFIC  ;  therefore  will  I  bring  forth  a  fire  from 
the  MIDST  OF  THEE,  it  shall  DEVOUR  THEE  J  and  I 
will  bring  thee  to  ashes  upon  the  earth,  in  the 
sight  of  all  them  that  behold  thee." — Ezelc.  xxviii. 

The  M.  E.  Church  has  "defiled"  her  "  sanctua- 
ries" by  the  iniquity  of  her  "  traffic."  And  does 
not  the  Almighty  now  threaten  to  cast  her  off  as 
profane,  and  to  destroy  her  ?  Is  not  the  portrait  of 
Tyre  too  true  a  likeness  of  the  Methodist  Episco- 
pal Church  %  If  she  does  not  put  away  her  ini- 
quity, violence,  and  merchandize  in  the  souls  and 
bodies  of  men,  the  days  of  her  prosperity  will 
soon  be  numbered. 

The  voice  of  warning  has  gone  forth,  and  the 
church  now  sins  at  her  peril.  Never  till  of  late 
has  a  Methodist  minister  dared  to  lift  his  voice  or 
•pen  in  defence  of  slavery ;  but  now,  the  man- 
siealer  and  robber  finds  apologists  and  defenders 
among  Methodist  Episcopal  preachers,  and  that 
too  in  the  Free  States!  The  church  is  stained 
with  blood,  and  haunted  with  the  groans  of  deaths 


62 


GROUNDS  OF  SLCESSION 


less  spirits.'  Surely,  it  is  enough.  God's  judg- 
ments  will  not  always  linger,  nor  his  justice  for- 
ever sleep.  She  claims  the  descendants  of  stolen 
human  beings  as  property  !  She  makes  slaves  of 
the  purchase  of  the  Redeemer's  bjood. 

Rev.  Wm.  Winans  said,  on  the  floor  of  the  last 
General  Conference,  that  he  had  become  a  slave- 
holder from  principle .' 

Members  of  the  church  have  been  expelled — 
class-leaders,  exhorters  and  local  preachers  have 
been  disfranchised — young  men  have  been  re- 
fused admission  into  conferences  for  no  other  rea- 
son but  their  being  active  abolitionists.  Travelling 
preachers  have  been  suspended  for  contumacy  and 
insubordination  in  relation  to  abolition.  Presiding 
ciders  have  been  removed  from  their  districts  for 
their  abolition  measures,  and  bishops  have  gagged 
annual  conferences  on  the  slave  question.  The 
Discipline  has  been  twice  altered  to  effect  the 
expulsion  of  the  editor  of  Zion's  Watchman,  it 
is  believed,  and  bi.shops  have  exhorted  Methodist 
trustees  to  close  their  houses  against  Methodist 
anti-slavery  lecturers.  Several  conferences  have 
forced  their  young  men  to  pledge  themselves  that 
they  would  not  agitate  the  church  with  discus- 
sions on  the  slave  question,  before  they  could  be 
ordained ;  while  no  reformation  pledges  have 
been  required  of  man-stealing  ministers  as  a  con- 
dition of  ordination.  That  which,  according  to 
Mr.  Wesley,  is  exactly  on  a  level  with  man-steal- 


FROM  THE  M.  E.  CHURCH. 


63 


ing,  is,  in  the  opinion  of  the  church,  a  very  small 
matter  compared  with  the  shockmg  abominations 
of  abolitionism ! 

Rev.  Elijah  Hedding,  D.  D.,  one  of  the  Methodist 
Bishops,  has  said  in  a  published  address  : 

"  Tlie  right  to  hold  a  slave  is  founded  on  this 
rule,  '  Therefore,  all  things  whatsoever  ye  would 
that  men  should  do  to  you,  do  ye  even  so  to  them ; 
for  this  is  the  law  and  the  prophets.'  " — Ch.  Adv. 
and  Jour.  Oct.  20,  1837. 

The  General  Conference  of  1840  were  guilty  of 
the  following  pro-slavery  measures. 

1.  It  was  proved  on  the  floor  of  the  General  Con- 
ference, that  the  word  "  or"  in  the  General  Rule 
had  been  changed  to  '■  ami"  by  carelessness  or  design, 
thus  favoring  slavery.  This  Stephen  G.  Roszel 
andDr.  Capers  boldly  asserted.  No  one  either  did 
or  could  deny  tliis.    It  was  proved  that  the  word 

or"  was  in  the  Discipline  since  1808  ;  and  since 
that  time  the  change  could  not  have  been  consti- 
tutionally made  without  going  the  round  of  the 
annual  conferences :  but  from  the  records  it  ap- 
pears that  this  had  never  been  done.  And  yet 
with  all  this  plam,  palpable  evidence  before  them, 
they  refused  to  make  the  correction  !  And  why 
did  they  do  this !  I  know  no  other  reason  but 
their  love  of  slavery;  or,  at  least,  their  fear  of  slave- 
holders. 

2.  But  to  cap  the  climax  of  pro-slaveryism,  the 
General  Conference  passed  the  following  resolu- 
tion. 


64 


GROUNDS  OF  SECESSIOX 


"  Tliat  it  is  inerpedient  and  unjustifiadi.e  in  any 
of  our  mivisters  to  admit  the  testimony  of  COLORED 
PERSONS  againat  a  white  person,  in  church  trials,  in 
those  states  and  territories  where  such  testimony  is  re- 
jected in  COURTS  OF  LAW." 

Here  the  rights  and  interests  of  tlie  membership 
of  the  Church  are  not  only  cloven  down,  bnt  the 
positive  authority  of  Jesus  Christ  is  set  aside,'and 
the  unrighteous  laws  of  a  slavehokling  communi- 
ty are  made  the  measure,  of  church  privileges,  and 
the  standard  of  ecclesiastical  proceedings. 

[It  is  true  the  Colored  Testimony  re.solution 
was  rescinded  at  the  General  Conference  of  1844  ; 
but  this  was  done  more  from  expediency  than  from 
pnnciple.  It  was  done  to  prevent  secession.  Had 
abolitionists  and  seceders  made  no  noise  about 
the  matter,  the  records  of  the  church  had  remained 
stained  to  this  day  !] 

Bishop  Waugh,  at  the  New  England  Conference, 
held  in  Springfield,  Mass.,  in  June,  1842,', refused 
to  put  the  question  for  the  adoption  of  the  follow- 
ing resolution,  stating  that  it  was  too  late  in  the 
day  to  give  his  reasons  for  so  doing. 

"  Resolved,  That  it  is  the  solemn  conviction  of 
the  New  England  Annual  Conference,  that  all 
slaveholding,  that  is,  all  recognition  of  the  right 
of  proi^erty  in  human  beings,  is  contrary  to  the 
laws  of  nature  and  religion,  and  ought  therefore  to 
be  discouraged  by  all  wise  and  prudent  means." 

The  influence  of  the  Bishops  is,  and  has  been  for 
years,  decidedly  in  favor  of  slavery. 


FROM  THE  M.  E.  CHURCH. 


6t 


The  same  is  true  of  all  the  General  Conference 
papers. 

It  is  not  slandering  the  Church  then,  to  say,  that 
as  a  whole,  she  is  pro-slavery  to  the  core. 

There  is  as  much  proof  that  the  General  Confer- 
ence of  the  il.  E.  church  is  pro-slavery,  as  there 
is  that  the  United  States  Congress  is  pro-slavery. 

And  those  brethren  who  come  out  from  pro 
slavery  political  parties,  in  consequence  of  theii 
corruption,  and  still  remain  in  a  pro-slavery  church, 
are  grossly  inconsistent.' 


SECTION  IV. 

THE  DUTY  OF  SECEDING  FROM  PRO-SLAVERY  CHURCHES. 

It  cannot  be  right  to  remain  a  member  of  a 
church  which  tolerates  slaveholding,  unless  it  be 
right  to  hold  communion  with  ??iart-,siea/ers — which 
are  the  Avorst  of  all  stealers. 

Mr.  Wesley  says,  "This  equally  concerns  all 
slaveholders,  seeing  men-buyers  are  exactly  on  a 
l^vel  with  men-stealers."  And  the  Bible  says,  "  If 
he  be  found  in  his  hand,  he  shall  surely  be  put  to 
deatli."  Here  the  crime  of  holding  those  in  bond- 
age who  were  originally  stolen,  is  considered  a 
crime  of  equal  enormity  with  that  of  the  first 
thieves — a  crime  punishable  (under  the  laws) 
with  Death  ! 

If  it  be  right  to  retain  a  connection  with  a  church 


66 


GROUNDS  OF  SECESSION 


which  tolerates  slaveholding,  then  it  must  follow 
that  we  are  at  liberty  to  remain  in .  fellowship 
with  any  other  class  of  sinners.  Slavery  involves 
almost  every  other  crime  :  it  is  the  embodiment  of 
the  most  frightful  crimes  that  fall  under  the  ban 
of  the  divine  law,  and  if  it  can  be  admitted  into 
the  church,  with  the  dark  cloud  of  guilt,  the  deep 
and  wide  channels  of  con-uption,  and  the  bitter 
and  overflowing  waters  of  human  misery,  which 
follow  in  its  train,  there  is  no  crime  this  side  of 
Pandemonium  itself,  Avhich  can  be  excluded  from 
the  Church  of  Christ,  by  the  laws  which  he  has 
enacted  for  the  government  of  the  same.  If  this 
sin,  when  tolerated  in  the  church,  does  not  make 
secession  a  duty,  no  other  sin,  nor  all  other  sins 
combined;  can  make  secession  a  duty;  and  we  are 
driven  upon  the  fearful  consequence  that  we  are 
at  liberty,  as  Christians,  to  remain  in,  and  support 
a  church  which  tolerates  every  sin  that  has  ever 
-been  committed  in  this  fallen  and  corrupt  world. 
When  the  church  spreads  her  fold  so  wide  as  to 
enclose  sinners,  she  loses  her  identity,  and  ber 
distinctive  character  is  merged  in  the  common 
character  of  the  world.  If  the  toleration  of  slave- 
ry in  the  church  does  not  make  secession  a  duty, 
the  existence  of  drunkenness,  fornication,  adultery, 
robbery,  and  theft,  would  not  make  secession  a 
duty  ;  and  yet  not  a  man  can  be  found  who  dare 
say  he  would  remain  in  a  church  after  it  had  re- 
peatedly and  publicly  refused  to  make  rules  for 
the  expulsion  of  persons  notoriously  guilty  of 


FROM  THE  M.  E.  CHURCH. 


67 


these  latter  crimes.  By  their  own  decision,  then 
in  relation  to  other  sins,  are  abolitionists  bound  to 
secede  from  all  pro-slavery  churches. 

The  same  principle  that  requires  us  to.expel  a 
corrupt  individual,  must  require  us  to  withdraw 
ourselves  from  the  association,  when  a  majority 
are  equally  corrupt,'  rendering-  their  expulsion 
impossible.  Now,  it  is  too  plain  to  be  denied, 
that  a  majority  of  the  M.  E.  church,  and  several 
other  religious  denominations,  do  tolerate  slave- 
holders in  the  church;  the  minority,  therefore, 
not  having  it  in  their  power  to  separate  them- 
selves from  the  corruption  of  slaveholding,  by 
expeUing  the  corrupt  party,  are  bound  to  effect 
such  separation  by  seceding  themselves  from  the 
corrupt  body.  If  it  be  wrong  to  remain  in  church 
relation  with  a  corrupt  individual,  which  must  be 
trae  if  the  church  is  bound  to  expel  corrupt  in- 
dividuals, it  cannot  be  right  to  remain  in  church 
relation  with  a  greater  number  of  individuals  that 
are  equally  corrupt.  The  duty  of  expulsion  rests 
upon  the  obligation  to  separate  ourselves  from 
sinners,  and  as  this  obligation  cannot  be  lessened 
hy  increasing  the  number  of  the  corrupt  to  a 
majority,  it  follows  beyond  the  power  of  contra- 
^diction,  that  when  a  majority  of  any  religious 
community  become  guilty  of  Avhat  ought  to  ex- 
clude an  individual,  the  minority  are  under  ob- 
ligation to  secede  :  and  as  slaveliolding-is  a  crime 
for  which  persons  ought  to  be  excluded  from  the 
Christian  Church,  it  follows,   b}^  an  iiTesistible 


68 


GROUNDS  OP  SECESSION 


conclusion,  that  all  true  and  honest  abolitionists 
are  bound  to  secede  from  their  respective  church- 
es, which  have  made  themselves  answerable  for 
slaveholding  within  their  pale. 

To  admit  slaveholders  to  the  Church,  is  to  say 
that  slaveholding  is,  in  the  opinion  of  the  Church, 
consistent  with  the  principles  and  obligations  of 
Christianity ;  hence,  the  Church  that  admits  slave- 
holders to  her  communion,  gives  the  influence  of 
the  Christianity  she  professes,  to  support  slavery. 
The  influence  of  the  whole  church  which  is  lent 
to  the  support  of  slavery,  by  admitting  slave- 
liolders  to  her  communion,  is  made  up  of  the  in- 
fluence of  each  individual  who  belongs  to  and 
sustains  the  church ;  therefore,  every  individual  that 
belongs  to  and  supports  a  church  that  tolerates  slaveri/^ 
lends  his  influence  to  support  slavery. 

God,  by  express  command,  requires  us  to  come 
out  from  all  religious  associations  in  fellowship 
Avith  sinners. 

Matt,  xviii.  17.  "  Let  him  be  unto  thee  as  au 
heathen  man  and  a  publican."  This  is  a  unii'er- 
sal  rule,  applicable  to  all  offences;  and  hence  it 
is  applicable  to  the  offence  of  slaveholding. 

1.  It  is  not  to  bep-egarded  as  merely  conferring 
a  privilege,  or  as  informing  us  what  we  may  do, 
but  it  is  to  be  viewed  in  the  light  of  a  command, 
imposing  an  obligation  which  binds  us  in  the  case. 
To  treat  such  persons  as  the  text  describes  in  any 
other  way  than  as  heathen,  is  to  violate  the  law 
of  Christ. 


FROM  THE  M.   E.  CHUROH. 


69 


2.  To  comply  with  this  command,  and  treat 
slaveholders  as  we  would  treat  a  heathen  man, 
we  must  withdraw  from  those  churches  which 
admit  them  to  fellowship.  We  would  not  beloiTg 
to  a  church  that  admitted  heathen  to  membership 
and  communion ;  and  as  Ave  are  bound  to  treat 
slaveholders  as  we  would  treat  a  heathen  man, 
we  must  be  bound  to  retire  from  the  church  where 
they  are  admitted  and  fellowshiped. 

Now,  let  us  inquire  wliat  relation  heathens 
and  publicans  sustained  to  the  worshipers  of  the 
true  God,  in  the  days  of  our  Saviour's  incarna- 
lion,  and  what  relation  have  they  even  at  this 
day  !  Were  heathen  and  open  sinners  permitted 
to  mingle  in  the  worship  of  the  Almighty  T  No, 
verily.  Are  they  now  permitted  to  sit  at  the  holy 
communion,  to  be  members  of  churches,  church 
sessions,  presbyteries,  conferences,  synod.s,  con- 
ventions, or  general  assemblies  1  These  persons 
liad  no  sort  of  religions  connection  with  the  wor- 
shipers of  the  true  God,  than  which  nothing  is 
susceptible  of  clearer  proof  We  do  not  suppose 
that  any  have  hardihood  enough  to  deny  the  cor- 
rectness of  this  position  Now,  as  the  worship- 
ers of  Jehovah  had  no  religious  connection 
whatever — were  not  allowed  to  have  any  with 
heathen  men,  neither  are  Christians  to  have  any 
with  impenitent,  trespassing  brethren.  And  this  is 
the  sense  in  which  we  are  to  withdraw  from  pro- 
slavery  brethren.  The  direction  of  the  Saviour, 
in  this  place,  means  that  we  dissolve  all  religious 


70 


GROUNDS    OF  SECESSrON 


connection  with  disorderly  persons,  and  it  means 
nothing  else .  .  This  would  fix  the  meaning  of  the 
text,  if  there  were  not  another  passage  to  the 
same  import  in  the  Bible  ;  for,  whatever  is  j^lainly, 
positively,  and  undeniably  taught  by  any  one  text 
of  Scripture,  is  true  and  of  Divine  authority;  for 
the  Scriptures  contain  a  harmony  of  truth.  They 
never  contradict  themselves.  But  this  passage 
does  not  stand  alone. 

1  Cor.  V.  5 .  "  But  now  I  have  written  unto  you, 
not  to  keep  company,  if  any  man  that  is  called  a 
brother,  be  a  fornicator,  or  covetous,  or  an  idola- 
ter, or  a  railer,  or  a  drunkard,  or  an  extortioner  • 
with  such  an  one,  no,  not  to  eat."  On  this  text  it 
may  be  remarked. 

1.  That  any  one  of  the  offences  named  brings 
the  offender  within  its  intent  and  meaning. 

2.  Every  slaveholder  comes  within  the  mean- 
ing of.  the  text.  It  not  only  includes  all  open 
sinners,  as  a  general  rule,  but  it  specifically  in- 
cludes the  sin  of  slaveholding.  Covetousncss  and 
extortion  are  clearly  among  the  attributes  of  slave- 
ry, and  the  text  forbids  us  to  keep  company  and 
eat  with  those  who  practice  these. 

3.  Keeping  company  and  eating  with  men  in 
the  sense  of  the  text,  cannot  be  supposed  to  mean 
more  than  Christian  fellowship,  or  belonging  to  the 
same  church  with  them,  therefore  the  text  clearly 
forbids  us  to  belong  to  the  same  church  with  slave- 
holders ;  and  hence,  when  a  majority  of  the  church 


FROM  THE  M.  E.  CHURCH. 


71 


persists  iu  retaining  slaveholders,  secession  is  the 
only  way  left  of  obeying  this  command  of  God. 

Here  is  a  plain  and  positive  command  not  to 
eat  with  certain  persons — disorderly  persons. 
And  both  Doddridge  and  Benson,  two  of  our 
ablest  Commentators,  refer  this  prohibition  to  a 
common  meal.  If,  therefore,  we  are  forbidden  to 
eat  a  common  meal  with  one  who  is  called  a  bro- 
ther, if  he  be  covetous  or  extortionary  (and  such 
certainly  are  slaveholders),  most  obviously  may 
we  not  commune  with  them  at  the  Sacrament. 

But  many  take  the  ground  that  we  have  no  con- 
cern as  to  who  goes  to  the  communion  table,  so 
we  are  right  ourselves.  We  may  take  the  forni- 
cator, the  thief,  the  idolator,  or  the  slaveholder, 
all  clotted  with  human  gore,  by  the  arm,  and  go 
to  the  holy  communion,  and  there,  in  the  nearest 
visible  approach  we  can  make  to  Christ  on  earth, 
hold  the  closest  communion  with  these  charac- 
ters that  can  be  held  out  of  heaven.  A  minister 
in  high  standing,  in  one  of  the  pro-slavery 
churches  of  this  land,  said,  not  long  since,  that 
he  would  go  to  the  communion  with  the  devil. 
But  this  is  not  the  doctrine  of  the  New  Testament. 
If  I  have  not  misapplied  this  text,  and  I  will  thanlc 
any  one  who  \vill  prove  that  I  have,  Christians 
are  forbidden  to  e.\t  the  Lord^s  svpper  with  any  but 
those  who  give  Scripture  evidence  of  piety. 

2  Cor.  vi.  17.  "  Wherefore  come  out  from  among 
them  and  be  ye  separate,  saith  the  Lord,  and 
touch  not  the  unclean  thing,  and  I  will  receive 


72 


GROUNDS  OF  SECESSION.] 


you."  This  is  a  comraand  to  Christians  to  come  out 
from  all  association  with  the  morall}^  unclean  and 
polluted,  and  as  slavery  is  as  great  a  sin,  and  as 
deeply  polluting  as  the  idolatry  of  the  Corinthians, 
it  is  as  binding  on  us  to  come  out  from  church- 
fellowship  with  slaveholders,  as  it  was  in  the  days, 
of  the  apostles,  to  come  out  from  their  heathen 
countrymen.  It  is  a  general  rule,  applicable  to 
corruption  in  every  age,  of  every  kind. 

Here  the  Lord  has  made  a  separation  from  dis- 
orderly persons,  the  conditions  of  sonship.  From 
all  these  Scriptures  we  prove  clearly  and  posi- 
tively, that  Christians  are  to  hold  no  fellowship 
with  disorderly  brethren,  or  other  disorderly  per- 
sons ;  they  are  not  to  eat  the  Lord's  supper  with 
them ;  they  are  to  ha  ve  no  connection  with  them, 
but  such  as  they  have  with  idolators  and  openly- 
profane  sinners.  If  the  passages  we  have  notic- 
ed do  not  prove  these  positions,  then  nothing  can 
be  proved  by  the  Scripture. 

Eph.  V.  2.  "Have  no  fellow.ship  witli  the  un- 
fruitful works  of  darkness,  but  rather  reprove 
them."    On  this  text,  Ave  should  remark. 

■1.  Slaveiy  is,  beyond  all  question,  one  of  the 
unfruitful  works  of  dai'kness. 

2.  To  belong  to  a  church  in  whicli  slavehold- 
ing  is  tolerated,  i*  to  have  some  sort  of  fellowship 
with  it,  whereas  the  text  commands  us  to  have 
no  fellowship  with  it. 

3.  The  expression,  "  but  rather  reprove  them," 


FROM  THE  M.   E.  CHURCH. 


73 


puts  fellowship  and  reproof  in  opposition  to  each 
other,  so  that  we  cannot  do  both  at  the  same  time. 
It  is  therefore  plain  that  to  scripturally  reprove 
slavery,  we  must  first  cease  to  fellowship  it,  by 
retiring  from  all  religions  associations  with  it. 

2  Thes.  iii.  6.  "Now  we  command  yon,  bre- 
thren, in  the  name  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  that 
ye  withdraw  yourselves  from  every  brother  that 
walketh  disorderly." 

1.  Slaveholders,  and  all  who  apologize  for 
them,  and  advocate  their  right  to  belong  to  the 
church,  walk  disorderly. 

2.  We  cannot  withdraw  from  such  only  by 
withdrawing  from  those  churches  which  tolerate 
slaveholding  in  their  communion  ;  we  are  there- 
fore commanded  to  secede  from  all  pro-slavery 
religious  associations. 

God  holds  us  responsible  for  the  moral  charac- 
ter of  the  religious  associations  to  which  we  be- 
long. We  will  here  introduce  the  testimony  of 
Mr.  Watson,  who  is  a  standard  author  with  all 
Episcopal  Methodists,  and  whose  testimony  they 
must  admit.    Mr.  Watson  says, 

"  Every  church  declares,  in  some  way,  how  it 
understands  the  doctrine  and  disciplinary  laws  of 
Christ.  If  fundamental  error  is  found,  the  evil 
rests  upon  that  church  collectively,  and  upon  the 
member.t  individually,  every  one  of  whom  is  bound 
to  try  all  doctrines  by  the  Holy  Scriptures,  and  can- 
not support  an  acknowledged  system  of  error 
without  guilt.  As  to  the  discipline,  the  manner  iu 
3 


74 


GROUNDS  OF  SECESSION 


which  a  church  provides  for  public  worship, 
the  publication  of  the  gospel,  the  administration 
of  the  sacraments,  the  instruction  of  the  ignorant, 
the  succor  of  the  distressed,  the  admonition  of 
the  disorderly,  and  the  excision  of  offenders  is 
its  declaration  of  the  manner  in  which  it  inter- 
prets those  injunctions,  which  also  it  does  on  its 
own  collective  responsibility,  and  that  of  its  mem- 
bers." 

The  simple  declaration  of  Mr.  Watson  in  the 
above  extract,  is,  that  every  individual  member 
of  a  church  is  responsible  for  the  doctrine  and 
discipline  of  the  same,  and.  so  far  as  they  are  ac- 
knowledged to  be  erroneous,  they  cannot  support 
them  "  without  guilt.^^  Take  the  M.  E.  Church 
then  for  an  illustration,  and  it  must  be  seen  that 
her  doctrine,  or  her  discipline,  or  both,  are  funda- 
mentally wrong  on  the  subject  of  slavery.  Her 
constitutional  bodies  declare  that  slavery  is  right, 
and  her  official  organs  contend  that  slavery  ought 
not  to  be  excluded  from  the  church.  This  is  all 
wrong ;  and  to  support  the  church  in  this  posi- 
tion, is,  according  to  Mr.  Watson,  to  incur  individ- 
ual and  personal  guilt.  His  doctrine  is  that  when 
the  church  made  these  declarations,  so  dread- 
fully erroneous,  she  did  it  on  the  individual  re- 
sponsibility of  every  member.  Whoever  may  be 
willing  to  stand  in  the  breach  and  stand  such  re- 
sponsibility, we  are  not,  wc  dare  not! 

The  church  is  bound,  in  her  collective  capacity, 
^  do  what  her  members  are  bound  to^do  in  their 


FROM  THE  M.   E.  CHURCH. 


75 


individual  relations.  If  individuals  were  not 
bound  to  hold  religious  connection  with  disor- 
derly persons,  the  church  would  not  be  bound  to 
exclude  such  persons  from  her  fellowship. 

The  church  is  an  institution  of  God,  and  all  its 
rights  and  obligations  are  from  the  divine  Insti- 
tutor;  none  of  them' are  acquired.  They  are  all 
ordained  of  God,  and  imposed  by  him  on  the  m- 
dividuals  composing  the  church ;  and,  as  these 
individuals  are  not  of  the  world,  but  chosen  out 
of  the  world,  the  church  is  not  of  the  Avorld,  but 
is  also  chosen  out  of  the  world,  and,  as  Christians 
are  bound  to  come  out  of  the  world  and  be  sepa- 
rate from  sin  and  sinners,  so  is  the  church.  But 
while  the  duty  is  the  same  in  both,  the  manner  of 
performing  it  differs.  Individuals  are  to  withdraw 
from  disorderlij  persons;  the  church  is  to  purge 
them  out — exclude  them  from  her  fellowship. 
The  ehurch,  in  her  first  organization,  is  composed 
of  persons  who  have  come  out  from*  the  world, 
and  separated  themselves  from  sin  and  sinners ; 
hence,  she  has  no  connection  with  either,  for  the 
persons  composing  her  have  none. 

But  Christians  do  not  become  free  from  their  in- 
dividual responsibility,  by  becoming  associated 
in  churches.  They  carry  with  them  into  church 
associations,  their  individual  responsibilities :  and 
whatever  would  be  wrong  in  their  individual  re- 
lation.s,  would  be  wrong  in  their  church  relations. 
Heaven  knows  us  in  our  individual  relation.*,  and 
in  these  relations,  and  in  these  oiil}^,  we  will  ap- 


GROUNDS  OF  SECESSION 


pear  in  judgment.  Each  will  have  to  give  an  ac- 
count of  himself  to  God.  The  judgment  of  na- 
tions, and  churches,  &c.,  takes  place  in  this  world. 
At  the  judgment  of  the  gxeat  day,  the  wickedness 
of  associated  bodies  will  rest  on  the  individuals 
compo.sing  those  associations.  We  are  held  indi- 
vidually resjDonsible  for  all  we  do,  whether  in  our 
individual  or  associated  characters  or  relations. 
Our  individual  responsibility  can  never  be  lessen- 
ed by  entering  into  associations,  but  it  may  be 
greatly  increased,  and  in  many,  very  many,  in- 
stances, is.  If  ten  men  fall  on  a  lonely  traveller, 
and  take  his  life,  our  laws  would  convict  the 
whole  number  of  murder :  each  one  would  be  as 
readily  hanged  for  murder  as  though  each  had 
separately  killed  a  man.  In  this  case,  but  one 
murder  has  been  committed,  but  ten  men  are 
guilty  of  murder.  The  guilt  does  not  divide 
among  the  ten,  but  each  is  held  by  the  law  as 
guilty  of  the  whole  murder.  And  this  would  be 
the  case  had  one  hundred,  or  even  one  thousand, 
been  engaged  in  the  foul  deed.  The  reason  of 
this  is  found  in  the  fact,  that  each  consented  to 
the  dark  deed;  and  we  are  guilty  for  all  the  heart 
yields  up  its  consent  to  do,  when  clear  proof  ap- 
pears that  the  heart  did  so  consent :  and  the  mur- 
der of  the  individual  in  this  illustration,  fimiishes 
that  proof.  But,  in  relation  to  our  final  Judge,  no 
proof  is  needed  :  He  knows  what  is  in  the  heart 
of  man,  and  knows  what  we  consent  to  do.  We 
see  from  the  great  moral  prmciple  on  whioh  the 


FROM  THE  M.  E.  CHUllCH. 


77 


laws  of  the  civilized  world  are  based,  that  re- 
sponsibility cannot  be  lessened  by  associations. 
But  I  have  said,  it  may  be  greatly  increased.  If 
ten  men  may  be  all  guilty  of  murder,  by  killing  one 
man,  on  the  principle  that  each  is  guilty  of  what 
he  consents  to  do,  had  ten  men  or  one  hundred 
men  been  killed,  on  the  same  principle,  each 
would  be  guilty  of  ten,  one  hundred,  or  one  thou- 
sand murders  ;  for  each  consented  in  his  heart  to 
the  murder  of  all,  and  did  his  part  to  effect  the 
awful  crime.  Now,  if  we  are  accountable  before 
God  for  all  we  consent  in  our  hearts  to  do,  or  to 
aid  others  in  doing — and  no  doctrine  I  humbly 
conceive  is  more  ckarly  taught  in  the  Book  of 
God  than  this — we  are  held  responsible  for  all  the 
wickedness  done  by  churches,  political  parties,  or 
other  associations  icith  which  ice  consent  to  act. 

This,  my  dear  brethren,  is  an  aw^ul  subjecL  I 
fear  that  human  responsibility  is.  as  yet,  very  im- 
perfectly understood.  The  thought  that  we  are 
held  accoiuitable  lor  the  evil  done  by  those  with 
whom  we  may  be  associated,  is  distressing,  truly 
distressing :  but  it  is  true-,  true.  And  it  is  to  pre- 
vent these  awful  consequences,  that  we  are  so 
frequently  commanded  in  the  holy  Scriptures  to 
liave  no  connection  with  the  wicked — to  be  sepa- 
rate from  sinners.  Truly  awful  will  be  the  con- 
sequences of  disobeying -tliese  oft-repeated  com- 
mands. 

In  the  Presbyterian  branches  of  the  church,  as 
also  in  the  Methodist  and  Episcopalian,  there  is  a 


78 


GROIXNDS  OF  SECESSTOir 


connectianal  fellowship  "wiiicli  unites  ail  as  one 
in  the  true  and  proper  sense  of  Christian  fellow- 
ship, and  this  is  also  true  of  all  church  organiza- 
tions not  strictly  congreg-ational.  In  the  Presby- 
terian and  Methodist  ehurclies  (I  mean  all  Pres- 
byterian and  Methodist  divisions  of  these  great 
sections  of  the  church),  there  is  but  one  co^mmu- 
nion  table,  because  these  sections  of  the  church 
are  one, — membership  in  one  place  is  member- 
ship in  every  place.  He  that  brings  a  regular  cer- 
tificate of  membership  from  Charleston,  S.  C,  or 
from  any  other  place,  can  claim  his  right  oi  mem- 
bership in  Pittsbui-g,  though  he  owned  one  thou- 
sand slaves — on  that  certificate  he  can  claim  his 
place  at  the  communion  table  with  our  anti-sla- 
very friends,  and  they  have  no  right,  or  power,  as 
Presbyterians  or  Methodists,  to  forbid  him  the  sa- 
crament with  them.  This  simple  fa^t  proves  that 
these  cliurches  have  but  one  commvniion  table, 
which  reaches  all  through  the  United  States,  if 
not  beyond  them,  and  those  who  go  to  this  table-, 
eat  with  all  who  eat  a}  it,  i.  e.,  all  the  members  of 
these  denominations  in  the  United  States.  It  is  a 
very  great  mistake  to  suppose  we  only  eat  with 
those  who  eat  with  us,  in  the  same  place,  and  at 
the  same  time.  This  is  true  only  of  churches 
strictly  congregational. 

All  Presbyterians,  Methodists,  and  others,  who 
have  great  denominational  connections  for  legis- 
lation, judicial  investigation,  or  government,  have 
but  one  communion  table,  and  he  who  goes  to  tha/t 


FROM  THE  M.  E.  CHURCH. 


79 


communion  in  any  one  place,  fellowships  as  truly- 
all  who  are  admitted  to  the  one  table  of  that  de- 
nomination, as  he  does  those  he  communes  with 
at  the  communion  in  the  church  where  he  stated- 
ly worships.  Those  who  are  strictly  congrega- 
tional, commune  with  none  but  members  of  their 
own  immediate  church ;  but  Methodists,  Presby- 
terians, &c.,  commune  with  all  of  their  denomi- 
nation. 

The  General  Conference  being  the  legislative 
department  ot  the  M.  E.  church,  and  that  body 
admitting  slaveholders  to  seats  in  it,  every  mem- 
ber of  that  church  holds  such  a  connection  with 
slaveholders,  as  binds  him  to  obey  the  laws  they 
may  make,  and  to  hold  his  membership  on  con- 
ditions they  may  lay  down. 

The  connections  which  exist  in  the  churches 
just  noticed,  as  also  the  connections  with  slave- 
holders, are  inseparable  from  membership  in  any 
such  chxn-ch.  Now,  if  slavery  is  sinful,  slave- 
holders must  be  disorderly  persons;  and  those 
who  would  obey  the  command  in  the  text,  and 
the  voice  of  God,  clearly  expressed  elsewhere  in 
the  Scriptures,  have  no  alternative  but  to  with- 
draw from  pro-slavery  churches ;  for  they  cannot 
withdraw  from d«or(/er/(/ brethren,  while  they  live 
with  them — this  is  impossible. 

Again :  if  slavery  be  an  unfruitful  work  of 
darkness,  we  cannot  obey  the  command  to  have 
no  fellowship  with  the  unfruitful  works  of  dark- 
ness, while  we  retain  membership  in  a  pro-slavery 


80 


GROUNDS  OF  SECESSION 


church ;  hence,  we  must  leave  such  a  church,  if 
we  a're  m  it,  to  obey  the  command  of  God. 

I  will  suppose  a  case  for  the  sake  of  illustra- 
tion. Ten  of  us  unite  in  a  church;  and  this 
number  might  constitute  a  church,  as  truly  Christ's 
as  any  that  ever  existed.  One  of  our  number 
commits  a  crime,  which  M'e,  as  Christians,  are 
forbidden  to  fellowship — say,  if  you  please,  ex- 
tortion or  fornication.  The  ofTender  is  called  to 
an  account,  and  five  out  of  the  nine  who  try  him, 
conclude  to  keep  him  in  the  chuixh  to  reform 
huti ;  what  must  the  four  do  ?  They  are,  as  are 
also  the  five,  forbidden  to  eat  the  Lord's  supper 
with  the  offender,  to  have  any  fellowship  with 
him.  They  (the  four  pure  ones)  are  required  to 
withdraw  from  this  disorder^  person — to  have 
no  fellowship  with  this  worker  of  darkness — and 
they  cannot  exclude  him  from  the  church ;  hence 
they  must  withdraw,  for  they  must  have  no  Chris- 
tian connection  with  the  vile,  impenitent  offender ; 
they  must  leave  the  church  to  obey  God,  and  save 
their  souls.  When  a  corrupt  majority  retaui  per- 
sons'in  the  church,  whom  God  forbids  his  people 
to  fellowship,  and  commands  them  to  separate — ■ 
to  withdraw  from — his  people  must  leave  that 
church.  God  requires  them  to  leave  it,  and  they 
must  be  saved  in  disobedience,  if  they  are  saved 
in  it. 

Psal.  1.  18.  "  When  thou  sawest  a  thief,  then 
thou  consentedst  with  him,  and  hast  been  par- 
takers with  adulterers."  No  charge  is  here  brought 


FROM  THE  M.   E.  CHURCH. 


81 


against  the  accused  party,  that  they  had  commit- 
ted the  crime  of  theft  or  adultery,  but  only  that 
they  had  consented  with  those  that  had  commit- 
ted the  one,  and  been  partakers  with  those  who 
had  been  guilty  of  the  other.  Will  it  then  be  de- 
nied that  we  consent  with,  and  are  made  partak- 
ers with,  any  class  of  men,  when  we  voluntarily 
unite  with  them  in  the  same  Christian  church  1 
If  not,  the  text  clearly  condemns  our  association 
with  slaveholders,  and  holds  us  responsible  for 
their  conduct,  so  far  as  we  unite  with  them  on 
terms  of  Christian  fellowship. 
/■2  John  X.  11.  "If  there  come  any  unto  you, 
and  bring  not  this  doctrine,  receive  him  not  into 
your  house,  neither  bid  him  God  speed  :  For  he 
that  biddeth  hun  God  speed  is  partaker  of  his  evil 
deeds." 

This  relates  to  false  or  corrupt  teachers.  The 
command  not  to  receive  them  into  our  houses,  is 
not  intended  to  prohibit  us  from  entertaining  them 
upon  principles  of  charity,  as  we  would  feed  the 
hungry,  and  clothe  the  naked,  but  to  prohibit  us 
from  entertaining  them  as  Christians  and  Christian 
ministers,  by  which  we  might  give  countenance 
to  their  corruptions.  "  He  that  biddeth  him  God 
speed  is  partaker  of  his  evil  deeds."'  Dr.  Clarke 
says  the  words  "  neither  bid  him  God  speed," 
"mean,  acoordmg  to  the  eastern  use  of  them, 
'  Have  no  religious  connection  with  him,  nor  act 
towards  him  so  as  to  induce  others  to  believe 
you  acknowledge  him  as  a  brother.' "  Taking 


82 


GROUNDS  OF  SECESSIOX 


this  interpretation  of  the  words  as  correct,  it 
follo\vs  that  to  have  reUgious  connection  with 
men,  is  to  become  partakers  of  their  evil  deeds, 
and  this  every  man  dpes  wlio  belongs  to  the  same 
church  with  slaveholders.  Do  not  Methodist 
bishops  bid  slaveholders  God  sjieed,  when  they 
lay  their  hands  upon  their  heads,  and  ordain  them 
to  the  office  and  work  of  the  ministry  1  And  do 
not  northern  abolitionists  bid  these  bishops  God 
speed  in  their  course,  when  they  suffer  them  to 
lay  upon  their  heads  these  same  hands  that  have 
jfist  been  taken  from  the  heads  of  slaveholders  ? 
And  do  not  all  the  laity  say,  God  speed  to  the 
whole  operation,  by  suffering  their  own  ministers 
to  be  ordained,  and  their  own  pulpits  to  be  sup- 
plied by  bishops  that  ordain  slaveholders,  and  by 
belonging  to,  and  supporting  a' church,  in  which 
slaveholders  constitute  a  large  portion  of  the 
membership  and  ministry  ?  Those  who  can  an- 
swer these  questions  so  as  to  exonerate  abolition 
members  of  pro-slavery  churches  from  responsi- 
bility, will  do  their  cause  great  service  by  exer- 
cising their  rare  gifts  on  the  subject. 

Rev.  ii.  14,  15.  "  But  I  have  a  few  things  against 
thee,  because  thou  h^ist  there  them  that  hold  the 
doctrine  of  Balaam.  So  hast  thou  also  them  that 
hold  the  doctrines  of  the  Nicolaitanes,  which 
thing  1  hate."  The  charge  is  not  for  believing  the 
doctrine  of  Balaam,  and  of  the  Nicolaitanes,  but 
for  having  those  in  the  church  that  held  these  doc- 
trines 3  and  the  same  principles  make  the  church 


FROM  THE  M.  E.  CHURCH. 


83 


responsible  so  Ion"  as  she  has  slaveholders  within 
her  pale,  and  those  that  hold  that  "slavery  as  it 
exists  in  the  United  States  is  not  a  moral  evil." 

Uev.  xviii.  4.  "And  I  heard  another  voice  from 
heaven,  saying,  Come  out  of  her,  my  people,  that 
ye  be  not  partakers  of  her  sins,  and  that  ye  receive 
not  her  plagues."  This  is  spoken  of  mystic  Baby- 
lon, and  beyond  all  doubt  it  refers  to  some  corrupt 
community .  From  it  we  may  deduce  the  follow- 
ing propositions  : 

1.  God  may  have  a  people  in  a  corrupt  com- 
munity. 

2.  When  a  community  has  thus  become  comipt 
as  a  body,  God  requures  the  uncorrapted  portion 
to  come  out,  that  is,  secede  from  the  corrupt  ma- 
jority. 

3.  Such  as  refuse  to  do  it,  by  such  refusal  make 
themselves  partakers  of  the  sins  of  the  body,  and 
render  themselves  liable  to  the  punishment  due  to 
such  sins. 

Here  is  a  plain  and  express  command  from  God 
to  his  people,  to  withdraw  from  a  corrupt  church. 
And  what  are  the  reasons  given  for  the  require- 
ment !^  That  his  people  be  not  partakers  of  the 
fallen  church's  sins,  nor  receive  of  her  plagues. 

I  take  the  ground,  that  when  a  church  becomes 
.so  corrupted  as  to  place  its  members  in  Christian 
fellowship  with  characters  which  God  has  forbid- 
den his  people  to  fellowship — which  it  would  be 
sinful  to  fellowship — that  church  has  reached  the 
point  of  corruption,  at  which  God"s  people  must 


84 


GROUNDS   OF  SECESStON 


leave  it.  And  when  a  church  tolerates,  sanctions 
or  in  any  way  approves  of  sin,  gives  countenance 
or  support  to  sin,  they  are  also  bound  to  leave  it, 
else  they  become  partakers  of  those  sins. 

We  cannot  remain  in  any  of  the  .pro-slavery 
churches  of  the  land,  without  fellowshiping  per- 
sons whom  God  expressly  forbids  his  people  to 
hold  fellowship  with ;  and  slavery  being  a  sin,  and 
the  churches  giving  sanction  to  the  practice  6i 
that  sinby  approving  of  slavenolders  as  acceptable 
ministers  and  members,  we  become  partakers  it 
that  sin,  if  we  do  not  come  out  of  those  churches 

God's  people  were  commanded  to  come  out  c 
Babylon.  And  Avhat  were  Babylon's  sins  ?  She 
traded  in  slaves,  and  souls  of  men. — Rev.  xviii.  13. 
Now  compare  Babylon,  as  here  described,  with 
the  pro-slavery  churches  of  this  day,  and  you  can- 
not fail  to  see  that  she  was  no  worse  than  they  are, 
if  as  bad.  They  who  trade  in  slaves,  trade  also  in 
the  souls  of  men ;  for  slaves  are  men  having  souls. 

Trading  in  "  slave!  and  souls  ofmen,'^  was  Baby- 
lon's chief  crime.  What  the  members  do  the 
church  does.  This  is  especially  true  when  the 
highest  authorities  of  the  church  permit,  allow, 
or  sanction  what  they  do.  The  members  of  Baby- 
lon traded  in  "  slaves  and  souls  of  men,"  and  the 
highest  ecclesiastical  body  of  the  church,  or  Baby- 
lon, still  allowed  those  who  did  so  to  retain  their 
membership,  as  good  and  acceptable  members. 
This  tells  the  whole  tale.  And  is  notthis  the  case 
in  the  pro-slavery  churches  of  this  land  1   It  is. 


FROM  THE  M.  E.  CHURCH. 


85 


The  members  of  these  churches  trade  in  "  slaves 
and  souls  of  men" — have  about  two  hundred 
BULLIONS  OF  DOLLARS  invcsted  in  immortal  souls, 
for  whom  Christ  died,  some  of  whom  are  the 
members  of  Clirist's  mystical  body,  "bone  of  his 
bone  and  flesh  of  his  flesh,"  '•'  heirs  to  a  crown  of 
glory  which  fadeth  not  away these  they  sell 
like  brute  beasts,  with  ^'beasts,  and  sheep,  and  horses, 
and  chariots."  ^Babylon  did  no  more .  Hell  could 
ask  no  more.  In  this  one  particular,  and  the 
main  one  too,  there  is  an  exact  agreement. 

But  it  is  important  to  our  inquiry,  to  know  if  the 
slavery  in  which  Babylon  traded  differed  from 
American  slavery :  and  if  it  did,  was  it  more  or 
less  sinful  1  Mr.  Wesley  said  that  American  slave- 
ry was  the  "  vilest  that  ever  saw  the  sun."  He  is 
good  authority,  at  least  with  Methodists.  But 
facts  are  authority  with  all.  The  period  of  Baby- 
lon's tradmg  in  "  slaves  and  souls  of  men,"  must 
be  one  of  two,  from  about  A.  D.  1000  to  1300,  or 
from  1521  to  the  present  period  ;  as  these  are  the 
only  periods  the  members  of  the  Church  of  Rome 
were  engaged  to  any  considerable  extent  in  slave- 
ry and  the  slave  trade.  The  slavery  of  the  first 
period  differed  from  American  slavery  in  many 
important  particulars,  and  the  difference  is  all 
against  us.  Slaves,  then,  could  be  sold  only  with 
tlie  soil ;  the  soil  and  slaves  could  not  be  sepa- 
rated ;  where  the  slave  was  born,  there  he  died. 
Under  that  system,  families  could  never  be  broken 
up.   Husbands  and  wives,  parents  and  children, 


86 


GROUNDS  OF  SECESSION 


could  live,  and  die  together ;  they  could  lighten 
each  other's  burdens  by  tender  sympathies,  by 
interchange  of  love.  The  wife  had,  in  the  hour 
of  distress,  a  husband's  bosom  to  confide  in  :  the 
husband  in  his  afflictions,  a  wife's  heart  to  feel  for 
him ;  the  son,  a  father's  council  to  guide  him  ;  the 
daughter,  a  mother's  tenderness  to  watch  over  her, 
and  a  mother's  bosom  to  dry  her  tears  in,  when 
heart-broken  and  afflicted.  But  none  of  these 
sweets  mingle  in  the  bitter  cup  in  America.  Here 
the  demon  hand  of  oppression  seizes  the  web  into 
which  is  woven  all  the  sympathies  and  loves  of 
social  life,  and  tears  it  in  pieces, — separates  for 
life  husbands  and  wives,  parents  and  children, 
prostrates  all  that  can  impart  any  joy  to  human 
life .  Then,  masters  might  whip  their  slaves,  but 
they  dare  not  employ  another  to  do  it;  all  the 
whipping  that  was  done,  was  done  by  the  mas- 
ter's own  hand.  Now,  the  master  may  employ 
as  many  unfeeling  wretches  as  he  may  choose, 
and  by  hired  hands,  whip  his  slaves  to  death. 
Then,  slaves  were  admitted  as  parties  at  law,  and 
could  implead  their  own  masters ;  then,  law  reg- 
ulated slavery,  and  the  slave  could  appeal  to  it  in 
his  own  person,  and  obtain  redress.  Now,  a  slave 
cannot  be  a  party  in  any  suit  at  law  whatever — 
now,  the  avarice,  cupidity  and  lust  of  the  master 
regulate  slavery,  and  from  these  the  slave  has  no 
appeal.  Then,  slaves  were  allowed  their  oaths 
against  their  master — now  denied  them  against 
any  white  person.   Then,  the  chastity  of  female 


FROM  THE  M.  E.  CHURCH. 


87 


slaves  was  protected  by  law  ;  if  a  master  offered 
au  insult  to  the  chastity  of  his  female  slave,  she 
obtained  her  freedom  by  making  oath  to  that  fact. 
Now,  if  she  does  not  yield  to  the  criminal  desires 
of  her  master,  she  may  be  whipped  to  death,  if  no 
white  person  be  present,  or  sold  to  some  distant 
laud  for  a  harlot.  From  these  facts,  we  see  that 
the  churches  of  our  land  trade  in  a  system  of  slave- 
ry far  more  wicked  than  Babylon  traded  in ;  and 
if  God's  people  could  not  remain  in  church  rela- 
tions with  those  who  practised  the  less  sin  or  evil, 
witliout  being  partakers  of  the  church's  sins,  much 
less  can  they,  if  they  continue  in  connection  with 
the  greater. 

And  now,  dear  brethren,  I  ask  you  to  look  at 
this  whole  subject  in  the  fear  of  God,  and  in  re- 
ference to  your  soul's  salvation :  let  each  one  ask 
himself  the  question,  can  I  be  guiltless,  holding 
fellowship  with  those  who  trade  in  slaves  and 
souls  of  men  7  Can  I,  dare  I,  sin  against  God,  in 
remaining  in  a  pro-slavery  church  ? 

But  it  may  be  said  we  are  bound  to  do  all  the  good 
we  can  in  the  world,  and  if  we  can  do  more  good  by 
staying  in  a  pro-slavery  church  than  by  leaving  it,  are 
we  not  bound  to  stay  ? 

It  is  true  that  we  are  bound  to  do  all  the  good 
we  can  ;  but  it  is  equally  true,  that  vv-e  can  do  no 
good  by  disobeying  the  commands  of  God.  To 
talk  of  weighing  probabilities  of  doing  good  in 
disobedience  to  God's  commands,  and  to  admit 
that  it  is  possible  to  do  more  good  by  disobeying 


88 


GROUNDS  OF  SECESSION 


the  Most  High,  than  by  obeying  him,  is  mon- 
strous. This  objection  takes  this  ground  :  that 
though  God  says,  "  come  out  of  her,  my  people,''^ 
they  have  a  right  to  reply,  we  think  we  can  do 
more  good  by  staying  in,  and  therefore  ought  not 
to  come  out.  God  says,  withdraw  from  every 
disorderly  brother ;  the  objectors  say,  Lord,  lean 
do  more  good  by  staying  with  him.  The  Lord 
says,  let  certain  persons  be  to  you  as  heathen 
men ;  the  objectors  say,  Lord,  I  can  do  more  good 
liy  letting  them  be  to  me  as  Christian  men.  The 
Lord  says,  have  no  fellowship  with  the  unfruitful 
works  of  darkness ;  the  objectors  say,  I  can  do 
more  good  by  having  the  closest  fellowship  with 
them.  The  Lord  says,  no  not  to  eat  the  feast  of 
unleavened  bread  with  fornicators,  &c. :  the  ob- 
jectors say.  Lord,  1  can  do  more  good  by  eating  it 
with  them.  Thus  the  plain  commands  of  God 
are  set  at  naught,  with  the  professed  object  of 
pleasing  him  and  doing  good ;  and  not  only  so, 
we  are  held  bound  thus  to  disobey  our  Maker. 
And  yet  this  objection  is  urged  by  ministers 'of 
the  sanctuary,  in  the  light  of  the  nineteenth  cen- 
tury. 

Ought  we  not  to  keep  slaveholders  in  our  Christian 
fellowship,  to  secure  our  influence  over  them  for  good  ? 

Let  us  apply  the  doctrine  of  this  objection  to 
some  other  sinners.  We  will  keep  drunkards  in 
the  church,  to  secure  our  influence  over  them,  and 
mali;e  them  better  to  their  families.  We  will  keep 
in  fornicators  for  the  same  reason ;  if  we  turn 


FROM  THE  M.   E.  CHURCH.  89 

them  out,  they  will  give  luirestrained  indulgence 
to  their  passions,  and  treat  their  poor  wives 
worse.  We  will  keep  thieves  and  liars  in,  to  se- 
cure our  influence  over  them,  and  to  make  them 
all  good  in  the  end.  This  is  the  doctrine  which 
is  brought  to  support  slavery.  But  this  is  not  all ; 
if  Ave  should  keep  such  characters  in  the  church 
to  reform  them,  we  ought  to  take  such  in  for  the 
very  same  reason,  and  not  only  keep  the  door  of 
the  church  open,  but  take  into  her  arms  an  un- 
saved world,  with  all  its  abominations.  And  this 
is  the  practice  on  the  subject  of  slavery  :  not  only 
are  those  who  are  slaveholders  kept  in,  but  all 
who  offer  are  taken  in,  if  there  be  no  other  ob- 
jection. According  to  this  doctrine,  we  ought  to 
have  all  the  sinners  in  the  world  in  the  church,  to 
secure  religious  influence  over  them.  Is  this  the 
doctrine  of  the  Saviour  1    No,  verily  ! 

Tlie  church  is  my  mother,  and  it  would  he  ungrate- 
ful in  me  to  forsake  my  mother.  Ought  I  not  to  cleave 
to  my  mother  7 

God's  children  are  not  orphans,  they  have  a  fa- 
ther as  well  as  a  mother.  They  are  bound  to  obey 
their  father,  even  God.  Now  suppose  my  mother 
should  go  a  whoring  after  strange  gods,  must  I 
forsake  and  disobey  my  father,  and  follow  her? 
I  trow  not.  Christians  must  obey  God ;  and  if 
the  church  become  so  corrupt  that  we  cannot  stay 
in  it  without  disobeying  God,  we  must  leave  it, 
I  fear  those  who  have  so  much  to  say  about  their 
obligations  to  the  church,  and  so  little  to  say 


90 


GROUNDS  OF  SECESSION 


about  their  obligations  to  the  Redeemer,  are  not 
the  ~  children  of  God — have  not  the  religion  of 
Jesus,  but  are  orphans — have  no  father,  are  chil- 
dren of  the  church — have  church  religion.  We 
are  bound  to  love  our  mother,  the  church,  so  long 
as  she  is  true  and  faithful  to  our  father,  God,  but 
no  longer. 

"il/r.  Wesley  was  opposed  to  leaving  the  churchy 
and  preached  and  published  a  sermon  against  schism. 
Mr.  Wesleij  was  no  seceder.''  Why  then  shoidd  I 
secede  7 

A. — Mr.  Wesley  in  his  sermon  on  schism  preach- 
ed the  very  doctrine  here  advanced.  He  says 
emphatically,  that  when  a  church  requires  its 
members  to  do  something  forbidden  by  the  word 
of  God.  or  places  them  in  circumstances  in  which 
they  cannot  do  what  God's  word  enjoins,  or  must 
do  what  his  word  forbids,  then,  and  m  that  case, 
they  are  not  only  free  to  withdraw  from  that 
church,  but  are  bound  by  the  law  of  the  Most 
High  to  do  it,  and  to  do  it  immediately  too;  and 
the  ruinous  effects  of  separation,  which  he  por- 
trays in  glowing  colors,  lie  all  at  the  door  of  the 
church. — See  Sermon  on  Schism,  vol,  2,  page  165, 
par.  17.  We  cannot  stay  in  a  pro-slavery  church 
without  doing  what  God's  word  forbids,  and 
leaving  undone  what  it  enjoins ;  hence,  accord- 
ing to  Mr.  Wesley's  sermon,  we  are  bound  to 
leave  such  churches. 

Jfthe  fact  that  the  sin  of  slavery  is  in  the  Church 
renders  it  a  dutu  to  secede,  then  the  existence  of  any 


FROM  THE  M.  E.  CHURCH. 


91 


other  sin  in  the  Church  must  farce  us  to  the  same  result; 
and  as  there  is  no  church  which  has  not  sin  and  sinners 
in  it,  how  can  we  belong  to  any  church  on  earth  ? 

Secession  is  not  urged  because  the  sin  of  slave- 
ry is  in  the  Church,  but  because  it  is  tolerated  in 
the  Church,  or  because  it  is  knowingly  and  publicly 
suffered  to  exist  in  the  Church.  Did  any  other 
sin  exist  in  the  Church,  under  the  same  circum- 
stances, equally  known  to  the  Church  and 
the  world,  and,  by  the  same  toleration,  it  would 
equally  demand  secession  on  the  part  of  all  those 
who  are  opposed  to  association  with  shiners. 
Take  an  illustration :  Suppose  we  belong  to  a  lo- 
cal church  or  religious  society.  Suppose  an  indi- 
vidual member  of  such  church  knows  that  ano- 
ther member  is  guilty  of  stealing  a  sheep — the 
crime  cannot  be  worse  than  to  steal  a  man.  He 
goes  to  the  church  with  his  complaint  that  A.  has 
stolen  a  sheep,  but  for  want  of  proof,  he  fails  to 
convince  the  church  that  Bro.  A.  is  guilty,  though 
he  is  sure  of  his  guilt.  These  facts  may  not  jus- 
tify secession,  because  the  church  does  not  sanc- 
tion theft ;  they  would  expel  A.  if  they  were  con- 
vinced of  his  guilt,  and  they  would  be  convinced 
of  his  guilt,  if  reasonable  evidence  were  laid  be- 
fore them.  But  suppose  the  accuser  convinces 
the  church  that  A.  has  really  stolen  the  sheep,  and 
they  refuse,  or  a  majority  of  them,  to  expel  him, 
on  the  ground  that  it  is  not  improper  for  sheep-steal- 
ers  to  belong  to  the  church — the  body  then  as- 
sumes the  responsibility  of  sheep-stealing,  and 


92 


GROUNDS  OF  SECESSION 


every  member  who  would  not  share  tliat  respon- 
sibility must  secede.  This  is  jjrecisely  the  gi'ouad 
on  which  we  urge  secession  for  the  sin  of  slave- 
ry; it  is  not  because  it  has  got  into  the  Church, 
and  lies  concealed  beyond  detection,  but  because 
it  is  suffered  publicly  to  exist  in  the  Church,  on  the 
ground  that  it  is  right  to  retain  slaveholders  in  the 
Church.  If  it  can  be  shown,  that  any  other  sin 
exists  in  the  Church,  by  the  same  public  toleration^ 
it  will  furnish  another  unanswerable  reason  for 
secession. 

It  is  sometimes  urged  that,  if  we  are  bound  to  secede 
from  the  Church,  because  it  tolerates  slavery,  for  the 
same  reason  must  we  secede  from  the  civil  compact,  be 
cause  government  tolerates  slavery.    How  is  this  1 

1.  The  principles  involved  in  the  two  cases  are 
not  the  same.  Membership  in  civil  society  does 
not  involve  Christian  fellowship,  and  is  not  under- 
stood by  the  world  as  endorsing  the  character 
and  sentiments  of  the  other  members  of  such 
civil  society,  or  the  laws  and  administration ; 
but  membership  in  a  church  does  imply 
Christian  fellowship,  and  a  sanction  of  the 
laws  and  government  of  the  same  so  far  as 
moral  principle  is  concerned.  We  may  belong 
to  a  church,  and  not  endorse  every  thing  on  the 
ground  of  expediency ;  many  prudential  rules  may 
exist  which  we  may  think  are  not  the  best,  yet  to 
belong  to  a  church  is  to  endorse  its  principles 
and  government,  so  far  as  to  say  they  are  not 
wicked — but  such  is  not  the  case  with  the  mem- 


FROM  THE  M.  E.  CHURCH. 


93 


bership  in  civil  society ;  it  is  not  so  uilderstood 
by  the  world. 

2.  If  the  objection  be  well  founded,  if  it  be 
true  that  if  sin  in  the  Church  makes  it  our  duty 
to  secede,  it  must  also  be  our  duty  to  secede  from 
civil  society,  because  such  sin  exists  in  civil  so- 
ciety, it  must  follow  that  we  are  no  more  respon- 
sible for  the  sin  that  exists  in  the  Church,  to  which 
we  belong,  than  we  are  for  the  sin  that  exists  in 
the  civil  society  in  which  we  live.  This  is  not 
only  contrary  to  every  man's  common  sense,  but 
it  must  involve  the  following  consequence.  As, 
not  only  slaveholders,  but  as  thieves,  liars,  drunk- 
ards, whore  masters  and  murderers,  all  belong  to 
civil  society,  we  must  either  secede  from  civil 
society,  or  we  are  at  liberty  to  remain  members  of 
a  Church  where  all  these  characters  are  admitted. 
There  is  no  way  to  evade  the  force  of  this  but  to 
admit  that  sin  in  the  Church  may  render  it  our 
duty  to  secede,  which  does  not  render  it  our 
duty  to  withdraw  from  civil.society,  the  same  siji 
existing  there,  in  which  case  the  whole  objection 
is  given  up. 

CONCLUDING  REMARKS. 

1.  By  adhering  to  such  a  church,  we  violate  all  those 
scriptures,  which  speak  of  church  order  and  discipline. 
That  Christian  churches  under  the  apostolic  gov- 
ernment, were  designed  to  include  none  but  Chris- 
tians in  heart  and  life,  will  not  be  denied,  and 
that  the  Scriptures  contain  rules  for  separating 
the  unworthy  from  their  communion  is  equally 
Diain.    These  rules  are  of  such  a  character  as  to 


94  GROUNDS  OF  SEC!eSSXON 


prove  it  wrong  for  us  to  remain  in  Christian  asso- 
ciation with  known  offenders.  Among  these  texts 
are  Matt,  xviii.  15, 17;  Rom.  xvi.  17;  ICor.  v.  5,  9; 
2  Thess.  iii.  6,  14 ;  "  Let  him  be  iiuto  thee  as  an 
heathen  man" — "  Avoid  them" — "  DeUver  such  an 
one  unto  Satan" — "  Not  to  keep  company" — 
"  Withdraw  yourselves" — "  Have  no  company 
with  him" — these  are  all  expressions  which  im- 
ply expulsion  or  secession,  and  prove  beyond  a 
doubt  that,  as  Christians,  we  are  bound  to  with- 
draw from  the  associations  of  all  unworthy  per- 
sons, or  exclude  them  from  our  associations. 
This  remark  is  to  be  applied  only  to  Christians  or 
'jliurch  associations,  the  members  of  which,  by 
ihe  law  of  Christ  and  by  the  common  sentiments 
of  the  world,  constitute  a  common  brotherhood 
To  remain  in  such  associations  with  open  offenders, 
as  all  slaveholders  and  their  apologists  are,  is  a 
direct  violation  of  the  law  of  Christ.  It  is  wor- 
thy of  remark  that  the  language  of  Scripture  some- 
times favors  the  idea  of  expulsion,  and  sometimes 
secession  or  a  withdrawing  on  the  part  of  the 
pure.  This  leaves  us  to  make  our  own  election 
under  the  circumstances  of  the  case,  exercising 
our  best  judgment  in  the  fear  of  God  ;  but  where 
corruption  exists,  we  must  do  one  or  the  other. 
Now  in  the  case  before  us,  the  expulsion  of  slave- 
holders and  their  apologists  is  not  practicable,  as 
they  are  far  the  strongest  party,  and  have  the 
constitution  and  government  of  the  church  on 
their  side,  under  which  circumstances  our  only 
means  of  obeying  the  law  of  Christ  is  secession. 


FROM  THE  M.  E.  CHURCH. 


95 


2.  By  remaining  in  such  a  church  we  render  our- 
selves liable  to  all  the  maledictions  implied  in  those 
scriptures  which  hold  us  responsible  for  the  associations 
we  sustain,  and  the  influence  we  thereby  exert.  The 
following  are  a  few  texts  of  this  class  :  Psa.  1. 18. 
"When  thou  sawest  a  thief  then  thou  cousentedst 
with  him,  and  has  been  partaker  with  adulterers." 
Slaveholders  sustam  both  theft  and  adultery.  Prov. 
xxix.  24.  "  Whoso  is  partaker  with  a  thief  hateth 
his  own  soul." 

We  cannot  see  how  we  could  more  effectually 
be  partakers  with  thieves  than  by  uniting  with 
slaveholders  in  a  common  brotherhood  to  pro- 
mote religion. 

Isa.  i.  23.  "Thy  princes  are  companions  of 
thieves."'  If  slaveholders  be  thieves,  which  can- 
not be  denied,  the  princes  (chief  ministers)  of  the 
M.  E.  church  are  most  notoriously  the  companions 
of  thieves.  Eph.  v.  6,  7.  "Because  of  these  things 
Cometh  the  wrath  of  God  upon  the  children  of 
disobedience ;  be  not  ye  therefore  partakers  with 
them."  1  Tim.  v.  22.  "Neither  be  partakers  of 
other  men's  sins;  keep  thyself  pure ."  2  John  11. 
"For  he  that  biddeth  him  God  speed  is  partaker 
of  his  evil  deeds."  Rev.  ii.  20.  I  have  a  few 
things  against  thee  because  thou  sufferest  that 
woman  Jezebel  to  teach  and  seduce  my  servants." 
Was  that  worse  than  for  the  M.  E.  Church  to  suf- 
fer slaveholders,  men-stealers,  to  teach  ?  Verse 
15.  "  So  hast  thou  also  them  that  hold  the  doc 
trines  of  the  Nicolaitaues,  which  thing  I  hate." 


96 


GROUNDS  OP  SECESSION 


Was  that  worse  than  the  doctrine  of  slavery  ? 
Rev.~xviii.  4.  "  Come  out  of  her,  my  people,  that 
ye  be  not  partakers  of  her  sins,  and  that  ye  receive 
not  of  her  plagues." 

And  now,  my  dear  brethren,  having  laid  this 
most  important  subject  before  you  in  the  plainest 
manner  I  am  able,  you  must  come  to  your  own 
conclusions  of  duty  from  the  arguments  presented. 
I  know  the  truth,  in  this  case,  has  fearful  odds  to 
contend  with;  church  attachments  are  powerful; 
we  have  many  friends  in  these  churches  whom 
we  love,  and  whom  we  ought  to  love  ;  these  it 
will  be  hard  to  separate  from.-  Ih  these  circum- 
stances, Satan  will  try  to  bind  us  to  sin,  the  vilest 
sin,  slavery,  by  the  very  cords  which  bind  us  to 
God's  people  and  to  God's  church.  Shim  this 
snare.  Let  not  feeling  enter  the  mind  while  this 
great  question  is  under  examination.  IMake  up 
your  mind  as  to  what  is  duty — what  God  requires. 
This  done,  recollect  that  he  who  hesitates  between 
duty  and  inclination  is  undone.  0  !  brethren,  I  feel 
for  you !  I  tremble  for  you  !  There  are  few,  very, 
few  questions  on  which  it  is  so  difhcult  to  act 
right,  as  on  this.  May  the  Most  High  God  and 
Savi/)ur  aid  you  to  do  your  duty  on  this  most  im- 
portant, most  difficult  subject,  that  you  may  stand 
before  him  at  last,  without  spot  and  blameless, 
which  may  the  Lord  grant  for  his  name  and  mer- 
cy's sake.  Amen. 


FROM  THE  M.  E.  CHURCH. 


97 


M.  E.  CHURCH  GOVERNMENT. 

SECTION  I 

THE  LAITT  EXCLUDED. 

The  Methodist  Episcopal  Church  has,  for  some 
years,  been  greatly  agitated  by  a  controversy  on 
the  subject  of  church  government. 

This  controversy  has  resulted  in  a  considerable 
secession  from  the  church. 

The  people  were  never  consulted  at  the  orga- 
nization of  the  M.  E.  church,  they  had  no  repre- 
sentative present;  but  a  few  ministers,  of  them- 
selves, in  the  city  of  Baltimore,  in  1784,  framed  the 
government  without  the  concurrence  or  consent 
of  the  people,  and  have  held  with  tenacious  grasp 
ever  since,  all  legislative,  judicial,  and  executive 
prerogatives. 

By  virtue  of  this  usurped  authority,  this  body 
has  imposed  upon  the  church  articles  of  faith, 
without  either  their  advice  or  concurrence,  and 
thus  has  interfered  with  the  free  exercise  of  con- 
science and  the  right  of  private  judgment,  on  the 
part  of  the  laity,  and  in  respect  to  matters  with 
which  their  personal  salvation  is  inseparably 
identified.  What  more  has  the  Roman  Catholic 
Church  itself  done  than  this,  in  controlling  the 
faith  of  its  members  ? 

They  did  not  embrace  and  approve  of  this  kind 
of  government,  in  the  act  of  joining  the  church,  for 


98 


GROUNDS  OF  SECESSION 


not  one  in  a  hundred,  if  one  in  a  thousand, 
thought  anything  about  the  principles  of  govern- 
ment when  uniting  with  the  church,  but  were  in- 
fluenced in  this  act  by  entirely  different  consid- 
erations. .  Neither  do  they  approve  of  this  kind 
of  government  by  continuing  in  the  church,  as  a 
large  majority  in  the  church  do  not  understand 
the 'principles  of  their  own  government,  nor  the 
government  of  reformers,  or  of  the  difference  be 
tween  them ;  and  among  those  "who  are  acquaint- 
ed with  them,  perhaps  there  is  a  majority  in  favor 
of  reform. 

•They  may  probably  be  influenced  to  this  course 
from  a  number  of  considerations,  foreign  to  the 
government;  such  is  their  attachment  to  favorite 
ministers ;  and  unwillingness  to  interrupt  old  as- 
sociations and  attachments.  Some  may  be  in- 
flueced  by  the  argument  taken  from  numbers  and 
popularity;  others  may  think  they  can  succeed 
better  in  their  temporal  avocations,  and  that  it 
will  best  subserve  their  secular  interests  to  belong 
to  so  large  a  community;  others,  again,  do  not 
like  to  leave  the  meeting-houses  which  their  mo- 
ney has  built ;  and  not  among  the  least,  is  a  fear 
that  the  new  church  will  not  succeed — which 
fear  ought  now  to  be  abandoned. 


FROM  TIIE  M.   E.  CHURCH. 


99 


SECTION  II. 

EPISCOPACY. 

Methodist  Episcopacy  was  established  by  Dr. 
Coke  and  Francis  Asbury.  Mr.  Wesley  did  not 
consecrate  Dr.  Coke  a  Bishop,  as  has  been  as- 
serted. We  have  no  proof  that  he  ever  made 
such  an  attempt — and  had  he  done  so  he  could  not 
have  succeeded  ;,  for  he  never  was  a  Bishop  him- 
self. He  could  not  therefore,  confer  powers  he 
did  not  possess.  But  he  could  and  did  appoint 
Dr.  Coke  and  Francis  Asbury  joint  superintend- 
ents of  the  Methodist  societies  in  North  America. 

Mr.  Wesley  did  set  apart  Dr.  Coke  by  th*  impo- 
sition of  hands :  but  this  ceremony,  though  it 
generally  accompanies  ordination,  does  not  prove 
anything  in  itself.  It  was  a  ceremony  which,  in 
the  days  of  the  apostles,  accompanied  appoint- 
ment" to  office,  where  no  ministerial  function  was 
either  conferred  or  recognized.  '  It  was  also  a 
common  ceremony  which  accompanied  the  re- 
ceiving of  the  Holy  Ghost.  Again,  Mr.  Wesley,  as 
the  father  and  founder  of  the  Methodist  societies, 
often  exercised  the  right  of  sending  liis  preachers 
to  particular  fields  of  labor,  and  in  doing  so,  he 
fipquently  laid  his  hands  upon  them  in  token  of 
his  blessing ;  and  this  practice  he  professed  to 
have  derived  from  Acts  xiii.  3.  In  one  of  his 
letters  he  thus  speaks, — "  Paul  and  Barnabas  were 
separated  for  the  work  to  which  they  were  called. 

This  was  not  ordaining  them — it  was  only  in- 


100 


GjROUNDS  OF  SECESSION 


ducting  them  to  the  province  for  which  our  Lord 
had  appointed  them. 

Mr.  Wesley  in  his  letter  ot  appomtment  puts 
himself  and  Dr.  Coke  on  a  level,  as  it  regards 
grades  in  the  ministry.  He  applies  the  term  pres- 
byter to  both.  Mr.  Wesley,  as  the  father  of  the 
whole  Methodist  family,  simply  "  appointed," 
"set  apart,"  Dr.  Coke  to  "superintend"  and  "pre- 
side over"  a  portion  of  his  great  family.  This  is 
all  that  can  fairly  be  gathered  from  the  commis- 
sion of  Dr,  Coke. 

Mr.  Wesley  gave  (in  this  letter  of  appointment) 
as  one  reason  for  the  step  he  then  took,  that  the 
Methodists  in  North  America  desired  "  to  continue 
under  his  care,  and  still  adhere  to  the  doctrine  and 
discipline  of  the  Church  of  England. 

We  cannot  suppose  that  he  Avould  violate  his 
solemn  ordination  vows,  by  ordaining  a  Bishop, 
while  he  was  only  a  presbyter,  and  also  that  he 
would  trample  on  the  discipline  of  the  church  to 
which  the  "  people  still  wished  to  adhere,"  by 
thrusting  upon  the  societies  a  Bishop  of  his  own 
creating,  contrary  to  the  discipline  of  said  church. 

Mr.  Wesley  undoubtedly  intended  that  Dr.  Coke 
and  Mr.  Asbury  should  ordain  other  Presbyters. 
The  necessities  of  the  case  he  supposed  would 
justify,  in  America,  this  departure  from  English 
usage  ;  but  he  could  plead  no  such  necessity  for 
making  a  Bishop — believing  as  he  did,  "that Bish- 
ops and  presbyters  were  of  the  same  order  and 
had  thr.  same  right  to  ordain."   He  did  not  confer 


FROM  THE  M.  E.  CHURCH.  101 


upon  Dr.  Coke  any  additional  ordination  power, 
but  merely  set  him  apart  to  superintend  the  flock 
of  Christ.  Mr.  Wesley  did  not  anticipate  that 
Coke  and  Asbury  would  assume  and  exercise  the 
office  of  Bishops,  and  organize  a  separate  and 
distinct  Methodist  Episcopal  Church. 

He  expected  both  preachers  and  people  would 
continue  under  his  care,  and  "still  adhere  to  the 
discipline"  of  the  established  church.  And  -when 
Mr.  V/esley  found  that  his  superintendents  had 
taken  the  name  of  Bishops,  he  wrote  to  Asbury  a 
letter,  of  "which  the  following  is  an  extract. 
"  How  can  you,  how  dare  you  suffer  yourself  to 
be  called  a  Bishop  T'  I  shudder,  I  start,  at  the 
very  thought ;  men  may  call  me  a  knave,  or  a 
fool,  a  rascal,  a  scoundrel,  and  I  am  content.  But 
they  shall  never,  by  my  consent,  call  me  a  Bishop. 
Tor  my  sake,  for  God's  sake,  for  Christ's  sake,  put 
a  full  end  to  this.  John  Wesley." — (^Moore's  Life 
of  Wesley,  vol.  2,  p.  285.) 

It  was  not  the  name  merely,  to  which  Mr.  Wes- 
ley objected;  as  the  name  was  scriptural,  he  cer- 
tainly could  not  object,  as  a  churchman,  to  their 
being  called  by  a  name  which  exactly  designated 
their  office.  It  is  ridiculous  to  suppose  that  after 
he  had  made  them  Bishops,  he  so  pointedly  con- 
demned them  for  takmg  the  name .'  Such  a  sup- 
position is  contrary  to  Mr.  Wesley's  whole  char- 
acter. 

There  is  evidence  that  Dr.  Coke  never  consid- 
ered himself  a  Bishop  in  the  Episcopal  sense.  He 


102  GROUNDS  OF  SECESSION 


appears  never  to  have  been  satisfied  with  his 
Episcopal  authority.  He  wrote  a  letter  to  Bishop 
White,  dated  Richmond,  April  24,  1791,  nearly 
seven  years  after  Mr.  Wesley  had  made  him  a 
Bishop,  making  a  formal  proposition  for  are-union 
of  the  Methodists  in  America  with  the  Protestant 
Episcopal  Church !  He  wrote  to  Bishop  Seabury 
of  Connecticut,  about  the  same  time,  making  a 
similar  proposition. 

In  the  former  of  these  letters  he  expressed  the 
opinion  that  he  "  went  farther  in  the  separation" 
of  the  Methodists  from  the  Established  Church 
than  Mr.  Wesley  intended — that  Mr.  Wesley  "  did 
not  intend  an  entire  separation" — that  Mr.  Wesley 
himself  "  Avent  farther  than  he  would  have  gone, 
if  he  had  foreseen  some  events  which  followed.'" — 
and  that  he  is  now  sorry  for  the  separation.  How 
much  does  this  look  like  constituting  Dr.  Coke  a 
BishoiJ  to  form  a  separate  Methodist  Episcopal 
Church  1  These  "  certain  events  which  followed," 
were,  doubtless,  the  assumption  of  the  name  and 
office  of  Bishops,  on  the  part  of  Coke  and  Asbu- 
ry,  and  their  conseqiient  proceedings !  In  this 
letter.  Dr.  Coke  styles  himself  a  "Presbyter  of  the 
Church  of  England,"  and  states  that  about  130 
preachers  had  been  ordained,  and  that  the  "very 
few,  and  perhaps  none  of  them  would  refuse 
to  submit  to  a  re-ordination.'"  So  nmch  for  the 
satisfaction  of  the  preachers  at  that  early  day 
vith  ordination  from  Mr.  Wesley's  Bishops !  In 
lus  letter  to  Bishop  Seabury,  which  Dr,  Coke  read 


PROM  THE  M.  E.  CHURCH. 


103 


to  Bishop  White,  he  suggested  that  in  case  of  a 
re-union,  "  there  would  be  use  in  consecrating  Mr. 
Asbury  to  the  Episcopacy — and  that  although  there 
would  not  be  the  same  reason  in  his  (Dr.  Coke's 
ease),  because  iie  was  a  resident  of  England ;  yet 
as  he  should  probably,  while  he  lived,  occasion- 
ally visit  America,  it  would  not  be  fit,  considering 
he  was  Mr.  Asbury's  senior,  that  he  should  appear 
in  lower  character  than  this  gentleman."  Hence  it 
seems  that  Mr.  Wesley's  Bishops  were  only  Pres- 
byters after  all — and  that  to  be  true  Episcopal  Bish- 
ops they  needed,  in  the  opinion  of  Dr.  Coke,  a  new 
consecration. 

As  lately  as  1813,  Dr.  Coke  applied  to  Wm. 
^Vilberforce  and  several  other  distinguished  gen- 
tlemen in  England,  for  an  appointment  to  the 
Episcopacy  of  India,  and  promising,  if  he  could 
obtain  that  appointment,  he  would  return  to  the 
bosom  of  the  Church,  and  do  all  in  his  power  to 
promote  her  interests.  It  is  as  clear  as  the  sun, 
that  Dr.  Coke  never  considered  himself  properly 
a  Bishop,  though  this  appears  to  have  been  the 
height  of  his  ambition.  "  If  the  less  can  bless 
the  greater;"  if  presbyters  can  make  Bishops, 
then  has  Methodist  Episcopacy  something  to 
stand  upon,  though  it  owes  its  existence  more  to 
these  self-styled  Bishops,  Coke  and  Asbury,  than  to 
John  Wesley. 

Mr.  Wesley,  in  page  314,  vol.  vii.  of  his  works, 
thus  states  the  whole  case.  "  Hence  those  who 
had  been  members  of  the  church,  had  none  either 


104  GROUNDS  OF  SECESSION 


to  administer  the  Lord's  Supper,  or  to  bajjtize 

their  children."  -Judging  this  to  be  a 

case  of  real  necessity,  I  took  a  step  which,  for 
peace  and  quietaess,  I  had  refrained  from  taking 
for  many  years  ;  T  exercised  that  power  which,  I 
am  fully  persuaded,  the  great  Shepherd  and  Bish- 
op of  Souls  has  given  me.  I  appointed  three  of  our 
laborers  to  go  and  help  them  by  not  only  preach- 
ing the  word  of  God,  but  likewise,  by  administering 
the  Lord's  Supper,  and  baptizing  their  children, 
throughout  that  vast  tract  of  land — a  thoiTsand 
miles  long,  and  some  iinndreds  broad."  The 
same  facts  are  referred  to  as  the  cause  of  Mr. 
Wesley's  action  in  this  case,  in  his  Life  by  Coke 
and  Moore.  They  there  state  "  that  Mr.  Asbury 
informed  Mr.  Wesley  of  the  extreme  uneasiness 
of  the  people's  minds  for  want  of  the  sacraments  ; 
that  thousands  of  their  children  were  unbaptized, 
and  that  the  members  of  the  society  in  general, 
had  not  taken  the  Lord's  Supper  for  years !" 
Again,  in  his  own  circular  upon  this  subject,  Mr. 
Wesley  says,  "For  some  hundreds  of  miles  to- 
gether, there  is  none  either  to  baptize  or  admin- 
ister the  sacraments  ;  hei-e,  therefore,  my  scruples  are 
at  an  end,  as  I  violate  no  order  and  invade  no 
man's  right  by  appointing  and  sending  laborers 
into  the  harvest:^  This,  then,  was  his  object,  and 
he  incidentally  cites  the  practice  of  the  Alexan- 
drian Church  as  sustaining  him  in  the  ordination 
he  performed.  Such  a  reference,  however,  would 
not  have  been  revelant,  had  he  ordained  a  Bishop, 
as  the  Bishops  of  that  church  were  elected  by  the 


FROM  THE  M.  E.  CHURCH.  105 


whole  church,  previously  to  being  ordained  by  the 
elders.  Can  any  one  believe  that,  at  that  time,  Mr. 
Wesley  intended  to  assert  and  defend  his  right  to 
originate  an  Episcopacy  ■?  Is  there  another  place 
in  his  volumiii'^ns  works,  where  such  a  right  is 
even  adverted  to  ?  We  believe  there  is  not  one. 
It  is  evident  that  the  sublime  conception  of  Meth- 
odist Episcopacy  had  not  then  entered  liis  mind  ; 
when  it  was  forced  upon  him,  we  know  hoio  he 
expressed  himself  with  regard  to  it. 

.The  case  of  Scotland  was  similar  to  that  of 
America.  The  societies  in  Scotland  were  without 
any  to  administer  the  sacraments,  and  many  mem- 
bers had  been  lost  in  consequence.  Hence  he 
says  in  his  Journal,  "  Aug.  1, 1785.  Having,  with 
a  few  selected  friends,  weighed  the  matter  tho- 
roughly, I  yielded  to  their  judgment,  and  set  apart 
tliree  of  our  well-tried  preachers,  to  minister  in 
Scotland."  Again,  in  his  works,  page  314,  vol. 
vii.  he  says,  "After  Dr.  (not  Bishop)  Coke's  re- 
turn, from  America,  many  of  our  friends  begged  I 
would  c  onsider  the  case  of  Scotland."  Then, 
after  mentioning  the  evil  arising  from  the  want  of 
ordained  ministers  there,  he  adds,  "  To  prevent 
this,  I  at  length  consented  to  taki:  the  same  step 

WITH  REGARD  TO  SCOTLAND,   AS    I    HAD  DONE  WITH 

regard' TO  America!"  .  The  three  preachers  re- 
ferred to,  were  undoubtedly  intended  to  superin- 
tend the  societies  in  Scotland,  which  were,  shortly 
after  this,  divided  into  three  circuits.  So  far  was 
Mr.  Wesley  from  originating  any  Episcopal  es- 


106  GROUNDS  OF  SECESSION 

tablishment  "  to  supersede  the  P.  E.  Church," 
that,  in  the  same  document,  he  (Mr.  W.)  says, 
"Whatever  then  is  done,  either  in  America  or 
Scotland,  is  no  separation  from  the  Church  of 
England.  I  have  no  thought  of  this !"  The 
"  SAME  step"  with  regard  to  Scotland  as  America. 

If  he  took  the  same  steps  with  regard  to  Scotland 
as  America,  and  ordained  no  Bishops  for  the  for- 
mer place,  is  it  not  very  strange  that  the  ministers 
of  the  M.  E.  Church  should  persist  in  asserting 
that  Mr.  Wesley  is  the  author  of  Methodist  Episco- 
pacy 7  It  certainly  is  ;  and  it  cannot  be  accounted 
for  only  on  the  ground  of  ignorance,  prejudice,  or 
dishonesty .' 

It  appears  from  "  Lee's  History  of  Methodism," 
that  when  the  society  was  first  organized  under 
Messrs.  Coke  and  Asbury,  these  gentlemen  were 
not  known  as  Bishops.  The  title  was  not  assum- 
ed until  about  three  years  after  the  organization,  and 
then  without  the  knowledge  or  consent  of  the  conference. 
We  know,  too,  that  mafiy  of  the  preachers  were  op- 
posed to  the  change,  and  that  after  considerable  de- 
bate a  vote  was  passed  not  approving  of  the  act, 
but  acceding  to  the  request  of  the  supei-intendents,  upon 
Mr.  Ashury's  explanation  of  the  term  to  allow  it  to 
remain.''^  Mr.  Wesley's  letter  to  Asbury  ap- 
pears to  have  been  (le.«patched  immediately  after 
this,  namely,  in  1788.  So  that  he  lost  no  time  in 
endeavoring  to  correct  tiie  evil. 


FROM  THE  M.  E.  CHURCH.  107 


Dr.  Coke  never  was  received  in  England  as  a 
Bishop . 

About  five  months  after  Mr.  Wesley's  death, 
the  Conference  assembled.  This  was  in  1791. 
Dr.  Coke,  who  had  been  seven  years  a  Bishop, 
was  present.  But  he  did  not  preside  as  Bishop, 
nor  yet  as  superintendent.  He  did  not  preside  at 
all.  William  Thompson  was  chosen  President, 
and  Dr.  Coke,  Secretary.  The  next  year,  Alexander 
Mather  was  chosen  President,  and  Dr.  Coke,  Se- 
cretary. And  the  three  following  Conferences,  Dr. 
Coke  acted  not  as  Bishop,  not  as  President,  but  as 
Secretary. 

Some  of  the  Wesleyan  preachers  supposed  Mr. 
Wesley  had  attempted  to  make  a  Bishop ;  others 
considered  it  a  kind  of  Presbyterian  ordination. 
They  were  all  thunderstruck  !  The  thing  was  done 
in  a  private  chamber .'  One  of  the  preachers,  when 
he  heard  of  the  transaction,  said,  "  It  is  a  new 
mode  of  ordination,  to  be  sure,  on  the  Presbyterian 
plan."  Another  said,  "  It  is  neither  Episcopal  nor 
Presbyterian,  but  a  mere  hodge-podge  of  inconsis- 
tency." 

The  M.  E.  Church  holds  to  two  orders  in  the 
ministry,  theoretically  ;  three  practically.  Metho- 
dist Bishops  are  inducted  to  the  Episcopaoy  by  a 
trifle  ordination.  The  forms  for  the  ordination  of 
a  Bishop  are  more  pompous  than  those  of  an 
elder.  The  pretence  that  all  this  parade  is  only 
to  ordain  to  an  office  (not  an  order),  is  a  miserable 
shift  to  avoid  an  obvious  difficulty. 


108  GROUNDS  OF  SECESSION 


To  admit  that  a  Bishop  is  superior  m  order, 
wbukl  be  to  admit  that  John  Wesley  made  a 
greater  man  than  himself, — or  that  Coke  created 
himself  a  Bishop,  and  then  created  the  triple 
crown  for  Asbury.  To  deny  that  a  Bishop  is  su- 
perior in  any  sense  to  a  jiresbyter,  would  be  to 
lower  down  the  Episcopal  standard — hence  this 
dodging  and  trimming  between  office  and  order. 
It  is  a  mere  play  upon  words — a  distinction  with- 
out a  difference. 

As  a  presiding  elder  is  next  in  office  to  a  Bishop, 
and  superior  in  many  respects  to  other  elders, 
why  not  ordain  him  ?    Echo  answers  why  ? 

The  Episcopal  Methodists  would  never  have 
had  any  doubts  about  a  third  order,  had  their  Epis- 
copacy come  from  a  regular  Bishop  of  the  estab- 
lished church. 

The  usages  of  the  established  church  are  more 
consistent  with  her  doctrine  of  a  third  order,  than 
are  those  of  the  M.  E.  Church  with  her  doctrine 
of  but  tivo  orders. 

If  the  bishopric  is  only  nn  office  in  the  church, 
it  is  about  the  seventh,  in  the  room  of  the  third. 
1.  Class-leader.  2.  Exhorter.  3.  Local  preacher. 
4.  Junior  preacher.  5.  Preacher  in  charge.  6. 
Presiding  elder.  7.  Bishop  !  Bat  the  bishopric  is 
the  only  office  that  happens  to  be  ordained.  Such 
an  ordination  to  office  merely,  is  supremely  ridicu- 
lous ! 


PROM  THE  M.  E.  CHURCH. 


109 


SECTION  TIL 

GENERAL    AND   ANNUAL    CONFERENCES,  COMPOSITION  . 
POWERS,  ETC. 

The  laws  of  the  M.  E.  church  are  made  by  the 
General  Conference. 

The  General  Conference  is  comiDosed  of  travel- 
ling ijreachers. 

The  travelUng  clergy,  by  their  delegates  in  Gen- 
eral Conference,  control  the  entire  church  both  in 
respect  to  its  "faith  and  pr-ictice,"  and  hereby  de- 
stroy the  very  foundations  of  all  religious  liberty, 
and  provide  a  basis  /or  rearing  up  an  absolute 
despotism. 

The  members  of  the  General  Conference  are 
appointed  by  the  Annual  Conferences. 

The  AnnKdl  Conferences  are  composed  exclu- 
sively of  cravelling  preachers. 

No  ooe  can  be  elected  a  member  of  the  General 
Conference  but  a  travelling  preacher. 

No  one  can  vote  for  members  of  the  General 
Conference  but  travelling  preachers. 

It  may  be  emphatically  called  a  government  of 
travelling  preachers. 

The  local  ministers  and  members  have  no  re- 
presentatives in  the  law-making  department. 

It  is  denied  that  they  have  any  right,  either  natu- 
ral or  acquired,  to  representation.  (See  the  re- 
port of  the  General  Conference  of  1828.) 


110  GROUNDS  OF  SECESSION 


The  travelling  preachers  assumed  the  power  to 
legislate  for  the  local  preachers  and  members. 

It  is  upon  such  principles  and  with  such  powers, 
that  the  legislative  department  of  the  M.  E.  church 
is  constituted ;  principles  and  powers  at  utter 
variance  with  human  rights  and  the  heaven-sanc- 
tioned equality  of  the  Christian  brotherhood. 
Look  at  it,  reader,  and  say  if  you  know  of  a 
parallel,  either  civil  or  religious,  except  among 
the  absolute  despotisms  of  the  Old  World. 

The  local  minisi-srs  and  members  have  no  neg- 
ative on  the  laws,  Which  are  to  affect  their  pro- 
perty, persons,  and  reputation. 

To  object  to,  or  reason  against  them,  is  called 
sowing  dissension  and  inveighing  against  disci- 
pline. 

The  penalty  annexed  to  this  a'lleged  crime  of 
sowing  dissension  and  inveighing  ugainst  disci- 
pline is  expulsion  from  the  church. 

Persons  can  be  expelled  by  this  rule  of  disci- 
pline from  the  M.  E.  church,  without  bemg 
charged  with  a  breach  of  the  laws  of  Jesus 
Christ. 


FROM  THE  M.  E.  CHURCH. 


Ill 


SECTION  IV, 

BISHOPS  AND  PRESIDING  ELDERS  ;  APPOINTMENT, 
POWERS,  ETC. 

The  Bishops  are  appointed  by  the  travelling 
preachers. 

They  hold  their  ofRce  during  life,  unless  removed 
for  crime. 

There  are  about  4000  preachers  whose  itinerant 
destiny  is  placed  in  the  hands  of  the  Bishops. 

They  have  no  appeal  from  the  Bishop's  decision ; 
they  must  either  go  to  their  appointments  or 
leave  the  itinerant  ranks. 

This  places  the  preachers  in  a  state  of  depend- 
ence on  Episcopal  power. 

They  can  favor  or  oppress  them,  in  giving  them 
good  or  bad  appointments,  keep  them  near  home 
or  send  them  afar  off.  They  may  be  under  the 
necessity,  sometimes,  of  learning  obedience  by  the 
things  they  suffer. 

The  Bishops  from  these  circumstances,  acquire 
very  great  influence  over  the  preachers  and 
people. 

This  was  exemplified  in  the  General  Conference 
of  1820,  in  putting  down  what  were  afterwards 
called  the  suspended  resolutions,  after  they  were 
carried  by  a  majority  of  upwards  of  two-tliirds  of 
the  General  Conference. 


112  GROUNDS  OF  SECESSION 


The  New  Testament  gives  no  account  of  such 
prerogatives  being  claimed  or  jiossessed  by  Bish- 
ops ;  and  Mosheim,  in  his  Ecclesiastical  History, 
published  by  the  M.  E.  church  (vol.  1,  p.  91), 
states,  that  "  a  Bishop  in  the  first  ages  of  the 
Christian  Church,  was  a  person  who  had  the  care 
of  one  Christian  assembly,  which  at  that  time  was, 
generally  speaking,  small  enough  to  be  contained 
in  a  private  house."  Again,  in  the  same  volume 
(p.  88),  Mosheim  says,  "  the  rulers  of  the  church 
were  called  either  presbyters  or  Bishops,  which 
two  titles  were  undoubtedly  applied  to  the  same 
person. 

The  most  alarming  prerogatives  of  Methodist 
Bishops  are — 

1.  Their  power  to  gag  and  put  down  the  annual 
conferences.  -  This  power  they  exercised  from 
1836  to  1840  on  the  slave  question  particularly. 
Their  right  to  prevent  an  annual  conference  from 
expressing  a  sentiment  by  resolution  or  report  on 
what  they  considered  an  important'  moral  ques- 
tion, was  warmly  contested.  The  General  Con- 
ference, however,  of  1840,  approved  their  course 
and  gave  them  this  power  by  express  provision 
This  prorogative  they  have  exercised  since  the 
last  General  Conference.  Thus  an  annual  confer- 
ence  of  200  members,  many  of  whom  are  older, 
and  perhaps  wiser  and  better  than  some  of  the 
Bishops,  however  much  they  may  feel  impressed 
that  they  ought  to  express  a  sentiment  on  a  moral 
enterprise,  may  be  prevented  by  the  Bishop,  if  he 


FROM  THE  M.  E.  CHURCH. 


113 


pleases  to  pronounce  the  proposition  unconstitu- 
tional or  out  of  order ;  and  admitting  no  appeal 
from  his  decision,  he  may  thus  trample  on  the 
consciences  of  his  brethren  and  do  it  according  to 
Methodist  Episcopal  law .'  And  this  is  the  monster 
which,  if  you  touch,  you  are,  in  the  opinion  of  a 
million  souls,  piercing  your  Holy  Mother .' 

In  1842,  at  the  session  of  the  New  England 
Conference,  in  Springfield,  Mass.,  Bishop  Waugh 
presided. 

The  following  resolution  was  introduced,  which 
the  Bishop  refused  to  put,  and  stated  that  it  was 
"  too  late  in  the  day  to  give  his  reasons"  for  such 
refusal ! 

"  Resolved,  That  it  is  the  solemn  conviction  of 
the  New  England  Annual  Conference,  that  all 
slaveholding,  that  is,  all  recognition  of  the  right  of 
property  in  human  beings,  is  contrary  to  the  laws 
of  nature  and  religion,  and  ought  therefore  to  be 
discouraged  by  all  wise  and  prudent  means." 

How  is  it  possible  for  a  resolution  to  be  more 
mildly  worded  than  the  above  ?  How  reasonable 
mat  such  a  resolution  should  have  passed !  How 
cruel  and  tyrannical  the  refusal!  As  lately  as 
1842,  a  body  of  Christian  ministers  denied  the 
privilege  of  uttering  the  above  language  1  Their 
rights  and  consciences  trampled  under  foot  by  his 
Holiness  in  the  chair! 

And  yet  ten  thousand  preachers,  travelling  and 
local,  and  a  million  members,  submit  in  silence 
to  such  treatment — to  such  a  government ! !  The 
10* 


114 


GROUNDS  OF  SECESSION 


same  power  and  prerogatives  which  the  Bishops 
have  in  the  annual  conferences,  about  two  hun- 
dred presiding  elders  have  in  the  quarterly  confer- 
ences— and  they  have  often  exercised  them. 
*  No  matter  how  much  any  people.inay  desire  a 
particular  preacher — no  matter  how  much  the 
preacher  may  wish  to  serve  the  people  ;  unless 
the  Bishop  please,  they  cannot  be  gratified — and  he 
don't  always  please,  in  such  cases.  No  matter 
how  much  they  may  remonstrate  against  his 
being  stationed  with  them ;  if  the  Bishop  pleases, 
they  must  take  him. 

I  will  give  a  few  instances,  out  of  scores  that 
might  be  selected  to  show  what  a  mild  clever 
little  thing  this  Methodist  Episcopacy  is — and 
how  it  regards  the  rights  and  consciences  of  the 
ministry  and  laity. 

At  the  session  of  the  New  York  Conference  in 
1839,  it  was  in  some  way  intimated  to  the  Wash- 
ington Street  Church,  in  Brooklyn,  L.  I.,  that  the 
Rev.  B.  Griffin  was  to  be  appointed  to  that  charge. 
The  church  accordingly,  through  a  committee  ap- 
pointed for  the  purpose,  presented  itself  before 
the  Bishop  and  remonstrated  against  Mr.  Griffin's 
being  sent  to  them  as  their  pastor.  But  the  re- 
monstrance was  disregarded,  and  Mr.  Griffin  was 
stationed  at  Washington  Street. 

At  the  session  of  the  New  England  Conference, 
in  1841,  both  of  the  large  societies  in  Lowell, 
Mass.,  petitioned  for  particular  preachers,  but 
they  were  told  that  they  should  not  have  the  men 


FROM  THE  M.   E.  CHURCH. 


115 


they  asked  for.  One  of  the  churches  [St.  Paul's] 
then  requested  to  be  left  without  a  supply  by  the 
Bishop,  having  made  arrangements  to  employ  a 
local  preacher.  But  the  Bishop  regarded  not  the 
request,  but  forced  a  preacher  upon  them.  In 
both  these  cases,  the  preachers  petitioned  for  also 
added  their  request  to  the  voice  of  the  churches 
so  that  the  wishes  of  both  preachers  and  people 
were  disregarded. 

Wesley  Chapel  Station,  after  being  denied  the 
preacher  they  wanted,  selected  some  four  or  five 
others,  and  stated  to  tlie  Bishop  that  they  would 
be  satisfied  with  either  of  them.  But  no;  they 
must  not  have  either.  And  to  cap  the  climax  o-' 
insult,  the  very  man  was  sent  them  to  whom  the]' 
had  objected,  either  officially  or  unofficially. 

One  circumstance  connected  with  the  LoweU 
churches  ought  not  to  be  overlooked.  In  conse- 
quence of  rejectmg  their  preachers  and  electing 
others,  they  were  publicly  declared,  through 
Zion's  Herald,  to  be  without  the  pale  of  the 
church.  This  was  done  by  the  two  rejected 
preachers,  with  the  approbation  of  the  presiding 
elder,  in  a  note  appended  to  the  Episcopal  Bull. 
A  very  few  who^dhered  to  the  rejected  preachers, 
escaped  these  maledictions.  This  alarming  step 
of  dismembering  whole  churches  without  the 
forms  of  trial,  developes  another  of  tlie  alarming 
features  of  Methodist  economy — especially  when 
it  is  considered  that  the  subject  was  carried  up  to 


116 


GROUNDS  OP  SECESSION 


the  Bishop,  and  he  approved  of  the  course  of  the 
preachers  and  pronounced  it  Methodism  ! 

Thus  tlie  doctrine  is  established,  that  when  an 
M.  E.  society  dares  to  reject  their  preacher,  it  may 
be  dismembered  at  a  blow!  Who  can  desire 
membership  in  such  a  church  1  True,  these  ex- 
scinded churches,  by  reconsidering  certain  resolu- 
tions which  gave  some  offence  to  the  Episcopacy, 
were  graciously  taken  back  again,  en  masse,  by 
these  divines,  with  another  stroke  of  their  Epis- 
copal pens.  A  new  way  this  to  expel  and  re- 
ceive churches — but  it  is  pronounced  to  be  ME- 
THODISM !  Good  Lord,  deliver  us  from  such  Me- 
thodism as  this  !    It  is  not  Wesleijan  Methodism  .' 

The  Chesnut  Street  M.  E.  Church  in  the  city  of 
Providence,  Avas  treated  by  the  Bishops  in  a  simi- 
lar manner,  about  the  time  of  the  Lowell  pros- 
criptions— viz.,  in  June,  1841.  This  was  a  large 
church,  and  it  liad  fixed  on  a  particular  preacher. 
The  request  was  unanimous;  but  it  was  rejected. 
The  consequence  was  a  secession,  which  has 
resulted  in  the  organization  of  a  Wesleyan  church, 
with  a  new  and  beautiful  house  of  worship,  all 
paid  for,  I  believe. 

2.  The  power  which  the  Bishops  have  to  trans- 
fer men  from  one  end  of  the  continent  to  the 
other,  and  that  contrary  to  their  wishes,  is  wrong. 
That  they  have  power  to  transfer  the  whole  or  any 
portion  of  the  New  England  Conference  to  South 
Carolina,  and  bring  preachers  from  that  Confer- 
ence to  New  England,  will  not  be  denied.  Bishop 


PROM  THE  M.  E.  CHURCH.  117 


Heddiiiff  has  openly  published  this  doctrine  to  the 
world.  He  says,  in  his  address  on  the  Discipline, 
as  the  only  sure  method  of  curing  "hsresy,"  and 
other  evils,  "  Let  the  General  Conference  com- 
mand the  Bishops  to  remove  the  corrupted  ma- 
jority of  an  Annual  Conference  to  other  parts  of 
the  work,  and  scatter  them  among  Annual  Con- 
ferences, where  they  will  be  governed,  and  supply 
their  places  with  better  men  from  other  Confer- 
ences. But  such  men  would  not  go  at  the  ap- 
pointment of  the  Bishop.  Perhaps  they  would 
not  personally;  but  their  names  and  their  member- 
ship would  go  where  they  could  be  dealt  with  as 
their  sins  deserve.  It  is  true  the  Bishops  have  au- 
thority to  do  this,  and  in  some  cases  it  might  be  their 
duty  to  do  it,  without  the  command  of  the  General 
Conference." 

What  a  tremendous  power  for  seven  men  to  ex- 
ercise over  4000  of  their  brethren  m  the  ministry  ! 
How  dangerous — hoAV  contrary  to  liberty  of  con- 
science !  And  yet  scores  of  young  ministers  are 
annually  bowing  their  necks  at  the  feet  of  the 
Episcopacy,  and  taking  upon  them  "  ordinatio 
vows,"  which  oblige  them  to  obey  their  chief 
ministers — without  making  any*  provision  for  tiie 
exercise  of  a  "  good  conscience  towards  God  !" 


118  GROUNDS  OF  SECESSION 


^  SECTION  V. 

RECEPTION  AND  EXPULSION  OF  MEMBERS,  ET€. 

Members  are  received  into  the  M.  E.  church  by 
the  preacher  in  charge ;  and  though  tliis  is  generally 
(not  always)  done  in  presence  of  the  society, 
there  is  no  rule  to  prevent  him  from  receiving 
members  obnoxious  to  the  majority.  All  the  class 
leaders  are  appointed  by  /urn,  and  no  steward  can 
be  appointed  without  his  nomination.  And  all 
new  boards  of  Trustees  must  be  appointed  by  him 
or  the  presiding  elder,  except  in  those  states  and 
territories  where  the  statutes  provide  differently. 
The  pulpits  of  all  the  Episcopal  Methodist 
churches,  built  on  the  plan  of  the  discipline,  are 
entirely  under  the  control  of  the  bishops  and 
clergy. 

The  funds  of  the  M.  E.  church,  amounting  to 
near  a  million  of  dollars,  is  the  exclusive  property 
of  the  preachers !  Out  of  these  funds  the  bishops 
are  served  first,  and  then  their  cringing  vassals. 
The  entire  property  of  the  church,  including  meet- 
ing-houses, cannot  be  less  than  five  or  six  millions 
of  dollars — probably  more.  The  use  of  this  vast 
sum  is  entirely  under  the  control  of  the  bishops 
and  their  agents — the  travelling  preachers ! 

In  the  trial  of  members  the  preacher  in  charge 
has  the  right  to  bring  the  accused  before  a  com- 
mittee of  his  own  creating ;  and  in  case  of  an  ap- 
peal to  the  quarterly  conference,  he  can  carry  the 


FROM  THE  M.   E.  CHURCH.  119 


matter  as  he  pleases — as  he  can  change  all  the 
leaders,  if  need  be,  any  moment. 

Let  Episcoi^al  Methodists  beware  how  they 
offend  the  preacher  in  charge,  as  he  can  dismem- 
ber them  almost  with  a  nod.  And  the  preacher 
must  be  equally  cautious  how  he  offends  his  pre- 
siding elder.  And  the  presiding  elder  must  take 
heed  to  his  steps  that  he  keep  in  the  good  graces 
of  "  his  holiness,"  as  he  is  entirely  his  creature — 
and  can  be  made  his  agent  even  contrary  to  the 
expressedj  will  of  both  preachers  and  people. 
The  government  of  the  M.  E.  church  is,  there- 
fore, a  government  of  bishops ! 


SECTION  VI. 

THE  GOVERNMENT  OF  THE  M.  E.  CHURCH  CONTRASTED 
WITH  THE  SCRIPTURES  AND  THE  USAGES  OF  THE 
PRIMITIVE  CHURCH. — TESTIMONY  OF  MOSHIEM,  LORD 
KING  AND  OTHERS. 

"  In  those  early  times  every  Christian  church 
consisted  of  the  people,  their  leaders  and  the  min- 
isters and  deacons ;  and  these  indeed  belong 
essentially  to  every  religious  society.  The  people 
were,  undoubtedly,  the  first  in  authority;  for 
the  apostles  showed,  by  their  own  example,  that 
nothing  of  moment  was  to  be  carried  on  or  deter- 
mined without  the  consent  of  the  assembly. 
Acts  i.  15 ;  vi.  3 ;  xv.  4 ;  xxi.  22.    It  was  therefore 


120  GROUNDS  OF  SECESSION 


he  assembly  of  the  people  which  CHOSE  RULERS 
and  TEACHERS,  or  received  them  by  a  FREE  ar,d 
AUTHORITATIVE  CONSENT,  when  RECOM 
MENDED  by  others.  The  same  people  REJECT- 
ED or  CONFIRMED,  by  their  SUFFRAGES,  the 
LAWS  Avhich  were  PROPOSED  by  their  rulers  to 
the  assembly;  EXCOMMUNICATED  profligate  aad 
unworthy  members  of  the  church ;  RESTORED 
the  pcnitentio  forfeited  privileges ;  PASSED  JUDG- 
MENT upon  the  different  subjects  of  CONTRO- 
VERSY and  dissension  that  arose  in  their  conimu 
nity;  EXAMINED  and  DECIDED  the  disputes 
which  happened  between  the  ELDERS  and  DEA- 
CONS ;  and,  in  a  Avord,  exercised  all  the  authority 
which  belongs  to  such  as  are  mvested  with 
SOVEREIGN  POWER."— Vol.  1.,  p.  37.  Wood  & 
Co.,  Baltimore,  1832. 

Now  of  the  sLx  or  seven  things  that  the  primi- 
tive members  of  the  churches  did,  by  authorita- 
tive investment,  not  more  than  one  of  them  can 
be  done  by  the  members  of  the  M.  E.  Church,  and 
even  that  one  is  denied  them  by  pretty  good  au- 
thority, as  will  be  seen  hereafter. 
•  Lord  King  on  the  Primitive  Church  affords  the 
most  ample  proof  of  the  correctness  of  the  fore- 
going quotation  from  Moshcim.  1.  He  proves 
that  bisliops  Avere  common  pastors. — p.  27.  2. 
"  When  the  bishop  of  a  church  Avas  dead,  all  the 
people  of  that  church  met  together  in  one  place  to 
choose  a  new  bishop.  So  Sabinus  was  elected 
bishop  of  Emerita  '  by  the  SUFFRAGE  of  ALL 


FROM  THE  M.  E.  CHURCH. 


121 


THE  BROTHERHOOD,  which  was  the  custom 
Uiroughout  all  Africa,'  for  the  bishop  to  be  chosen 
in  the  presence  of  the  people.'— p.  37. 

"  111  all  ordinations  all  the  people  were  consult- 
ed, and  none  were  admitted  into  holy  orders 
without  their  approbation,  as  is  assured  by 
Cyprian,  bishop  of  this  diocese,  who  tells  us  that 
it  was  his  constant  custom  '  in  all  ordinations  to 
consult  his  people,  and  with  their  common  coun- 
sel to  weigh  the  merits  of  every  candidate  for 
sacred  orders.'" — p.  47. 

Of  the  members  of  the  primitive  churches.  Lord 
King  observes  :  "  As  soon  as  they  were  baptized 
they  commenced  members  of  the  church  univer- 
sal, and  of  that  particular  church  wherein  they 
were  baptized,  and  became  actual  sharers  and 
exerters  of  all  the  privileges  and  powers  of  the 
faithful.  What  the  distinct  and  separate  powers 
of  the  faithful  were,  must  be  next  considered; 
several  of  them,  to  make  the  discourse  under  the 
former  head  complete,  we  touched  there,  as  their 
election  and  choice  of  their  bishops,  their  atten- 
tion to  those  who  were  ordained,  and  such  like, 
which  will  be  unnecessary  and  tedious  to  repeat 
here  ;  and  others  of  them  cannot  be  well  separat- 
ed from  their  conjunct  acts  with  the  clergy.  As 
tlicy  had  power  to  elect  their  bishops,  so  if  their 
bishops  proved  afterwards  scandalous  and  grossly 
wicked  in  life,  or  at  least  heretical  in  doctrine  and 
apostates  from  the  faith,  they  had  power  to  de- 


GROUNDS  OF  SECESSION 


pose  them  and  choose  others  in  their  room." — 
p.  161. 

"  As  for  the  judges  thut  compose  the  consistory 
or  ecclesiastical  court,  before  whom  offending 
criminals  were  convened  and  by  whom  censured, 
they  will  appear  to  have  been  the  whole  church, 
both  clergy  and  laity;  not  the  bishop  without 
the  people,  nor  the  people  without  the  bishop,  but 
both  conjunctly  constituted  that  supreme  tribu- 
nal, which -censured  delinquents  and  transgress- 
ors."—p.  109. 

"  But  as  for  the  legislative'  decretive  or  jud?- 
catorial  power,  that  appertained  both  to  clergy  and 
laity,  who  conjointly  made  up  that  SUPREME 
consistoral  court,  which  was  in  every  iiarish,  be- 
fore which  all  offenders  were  tried,  and  if  found 
guilty,  sentenced  and  condemned." — p.  111. 

"And  whosoever  will  consider  the  frequent 
synods  that  are  mentioned  in  Cyprian,  will  find 
that  in  his  province  they  met  at  least  once  and 
sometimes  twice  or  thrice  in  a  year.  As  for  the 
members  that  composed  these  synods,  they  were 
bishops,  presbyters,  deacons,  and  deputed  lay- 
men in  behalf  of  the  people  of  their  respective 
churches." — p.  132. 

"  When  a  synod  Avas  convened,  before  ever  they 
entered  upon  any  public  causes,  they  chose  out 
of  the  gravest  and  renowndest  bishops  among 
them,  one,  or  sometimes  two,  to  be  their  modera- 
tor or  moderators.   The  office  of  a  moderator  was 


FKOM  THE  M.  E.  CHURCH. 


123 


to  PRESIDE  in  the  synod,  to  see  all  things  calmly 
and  fairly  debated  and  decreed ;  and  at  the  con- 
clusion of  the  cause  to  sum  up  what  had  been 
debated  and  urged  on  both  sides,  to  take  the  votes 
and  suffrages  of  the  members  of  the  synod ;  and 
last  of  all  to  give  his  own." — p.  134. 

"  When  a  moderator  was  chosen,  then  they 
entered  upon  the  consideration  of  the  affairs 
which  lay  before  them,  which  may  be  considered 
in  a  twofold  respect,  either  as  'relating  to  foreign 
churches,  or  to  those  churches  only  of  whom 
they  were  representatives.  As  for  foreign  church- 
es, their  determinations  were  not  obligatory  unto 
them,  because  they  were  NOT  REPRESENTED 
BY  THEM ;  and  so  the  chief  matter  they  had  to 
do  v.'itli  them  was,  to  give  them  their  advice  and 
counsel,  in  any  difhcult  point  proposed." 

"  But  Avith  respect  unto  those  particular  church- 
es whose  representatives  they  were,  the  decrees 
were  binding  and  obligatory,  since  the  regulation 
and  management  of  their  affairs  was  the  general 
end  of  their  convening." — p.  135. 

In  Dr.  Ruter's  History  of  the  Church,  published 
at  the  Methodist  Book  Room,  we  have  the  same 
testimony  substantially,  as  that  of  Mosheim  and 
Lord  King.  He  says:  "Presbyters  were  chosen 
by  the  imited  consent  of  their  clerical  brethren 
and  the  people  at  large,  and  ordained  by  the 
Bishops,  assisted  by  the  presbyters." — p.  26. 

Of  the  beginning  of-  the  second  century,  he 
says:  '-'The  bishops  and  presbyters  were  still 


124  GBOUNDS  OF  SECESSION 

undistinguished  by  any  superiority  of  station  oi 
difference  of  apparel ;  they  were  stili.  chosen  by 
the  people,  and  subsisted  upon  a  proportion  of 
the  voluntary  offerings  which  were  paid_by  every 
believer  according  to  the  exigencies  of  the  occa- 
sion, or  the  measure  of  his  wealth  and  piety." 

The  following  scriptures  show  the  part  the 
members  of  the  church  took  in  ecclesiastical  af- 
fairs, in  the  primitive  church.  Acts  i.  15.  The 
multitude  were  instructed  to  choose  Matthias,  to 
fill  the  vacancy  caused  by  the  apostacy  of  Judas. 
Chap.  vi.  3.  The  multitude  of  the  disciples,  by 
the  directions  of  the  apostles,  chose  the  seven 
deacons.  Chap.  xv.  The  important  question 
respecting  circumcision,  which  agitated  the  church 
at  Antioch,  was  considered  and  decided  by  the 
apostles,  elders  and  brethren.  And  the  letter  written 
to  the  church  at  Antioch,  began  in  this  Christian 
and  republican  manner  :  "  The  apostles  and  elders 
and  brethren  send  greeting,"  &c.  At  the  same  time 
this  assembly  chose  Barsabas  and  Silas,  chief  men 
among  the  brethren,  to  go  with  Paul  and  Barna- 
bas, and  convey  the  letter  upon  this  subject. 
Chap.  xi.  22.  The  church  at  Jerusalem  sent  Bar- 
nabas on  a  mission  to  Antioch  and  other  places. 
The  church  did  it.  Chap.  xiv.  27.  Paul  and 
Barnabas  gave  an  account  of  their  labors  among 
the  Gentiles,  to  the  church;  not  to  a  body  of  min- 
isters— not  even  to  the  apostles  themselves. 
Chap,  xviii.  27.  The  brethren  wrote,  recommend- 
ing Apollos,  eloquent  Apollos,  to  the  reception  of 


PROM  THE  M,  E.  CHURCH. 


125 


the  discijiles  iii  the  region  of  Achaia.  Besides 
all  this,  churches  sent  their  salutations  to  other 
churches — sent  messengers  to  their  brethren.  2 
Cor.  viii.  23.  Luke  was  chosen  of  the  churches 
to  travel  with  St.  Paul. 

Muiisters  had  some  voice  in  the  selection  of 
their  fields  of  labor,  and  at  times  declined  to  com- 
ply with  the  wishes  even  of  an  apostle.  This  is 
evident  from  1  Cor.  xvi.  12.  Titus  went  to  Corinth 
of  his  own  accord.    2  Cor.  viii.  17. 

THE  POWERS  AND  INVESTMENTS  OF  THE  MINISTRY  OF 
THE  M.  E.  CHURCH  ANTI-PRIMITIVE. 

1.  The  government  of  the  M.  E.  Church  is 
wholly  under  the  control  of  the  ministry,  and 
ever  has  been  since  its  organization.  Proof. — 
Discipline,  page  8,  giving  the  particulars  of  the 
organization  of  the  jM.  E.  Church  in  Baltimore, 
1784.  Those  who  composed  this  conference  were 
ministers,  and  only  ministers,  though  there  were 
then  in  the  societies  in  the  states,  14,988  members. 
And  from  that  time  to  the  present,  the  only  body 
claiming  the  right  of  making  laws  for  the  govern- 
ment of  the  church,  have  been  ministers,  and 
only  ministers.  There  never  was  a  layman  ad- 
mitted to  an  assembly  in  the  M.  E.  Church,  which 
was  organized  for  the  purpose  of  regulating  its 
government ;  nor  was  ever  a  layman  admitted  to 
vote  in  the  election  of  delegates  who  compose 
the  General  Conference,  the  law-makmg  body. 
All  and  every  alteration  that  is  made  in  the  Disci- 


126 


GROUNDS  OF  SECESSION 


pllne,and  government  of  the  church,  is  effected 
solely  by  the  mmistry ;  and  the  only  alternative 
left  for  the  membership  is,  to  submit  to  laws  en- 
acted without  their  being  representedj  or  to  leave 
the  church, 

2.  Bishops  are  empowered  with  the  preroga- 
tive of  overseeing  the  spiritual  and  temporal 
business  of  the  church. — Dis.  page  27,  answer  5. 
How  much  is  meant  by  overseeing  the  temporal 
business  of  the  church,  the  writer  ne\'er  knew; 
but  as  the  overseeing  of  the  spiritual  business  is 
an  authoritative  investment,  the  conclusion  is, 
that  it  is  the  same  in  relation  to  the  temporal  busi- 
ness of  it. 

3.  Both  deacons  and  elders  are  constituted  by  a 
body  of  ministers  only. — Dis.  pp.  32,  33.  In  the 
case  of  local  preachers,  the  quarterly  conference 
recommend  them  to  the  annual  conference,  but 
no  one  can  be  ordained  without  an  election  by 
the  travelling  ministry  of  an  annual  conference ; 
and  in  the  case  of  itinerant  ministers,  the  people 
have  nothing  to  say  in  relation  to  their  being  con- 
stituted either  deacons  or  elders. 

4.  A  Bishop,  or  presiding  elder,  can  either  of 
them  receive  a  preacher  to  travel  in  the  interval 
of  a  conference,  independent  of  the  voice  of  the 
people. — Dis.  p.  36. 

5.  Those  whovhave  charge  of  circuits,  can 
choose  committees  independently  of  all  the  mem- 
bers of  their  charge,  to  appropriate  moneys  that 
have  been  raised  for  building  churches,  and  pay- 


FROM  THE  M.   E.  CHURCH. 


127 


ing  debts  upon  churches. — Dis.  p.  44,  answers 
17,  18. 

6.  The  Bishops  of  the  M.  E.  Church,  have  the 
absolute  jmrer  of  determining  the  appointments  of 
the  whole  of  the  travelhng  ministry,  where  and 
how  they  please ;  and  neither  the  ministry  or  mem- 
bership liave  the  right  to  interfere  in  any  manner 
whatever.  This  is  the  right  of  the  Bishop  un- 
checked ;  nor  is  there  any  possible  means  for  the 
abridgment  of  this  power  by  the  people. — Dis. 
p.  25.^ 

7.  The  power  of  Bishops  absorbs  all  the  power 
of  presiding  elders  and  preachers  in  charge. 
Proof. — They  are  general  superintendents.  A  su- 
perintendent has  authority  to  do  by  himself  what 
he  can  do  by  another.  This  is  universally  true. 
But  we  are  not  left  to  rest  the  matter  here.  The 
proof  is  abundant  from  the  Discipline,  as  well  as 
from  the  nature  of  their  office.  When  a  Bishop 
is  present,  he  is  the  first  one  named  to  do  the  bu- 
siness to  be  done.  If  a  preacher  is  to  be  received 
in  the  interval  of  the  annual  conference,  the 
bishop  or  presiding  elder  is  to  do  it.  Showing  that 
the  bishop  is  to  do  it  of  right,  if  present,  and  dis- 
posed to  exercise  it. — Dis.  p.  36. 

A  preacher  must  have  his  license  signed  by  a 
bishop  or  presiding  elder ;  showing  the  same  fact, 
that  if  a  bishop  is  present,  he  has  the  authority, 
and  not  the  presiding  elder,  to  sign  such  license. 
— p.  37.  Presiding  elders  have  authority  to  try  a 
travelling  preacher  onhj  in  the  absence  of  the 


128  GROUNDS   OF  SECESSrON' 


bisliop.  The  bishops  have  the  authority  in  all  these 
cases  when  present. — p.  G5.  In  the  trial  of  mem- 
bers, biskops  are  the  first  class  of  administrators 
named  to  preside,  and  then  elders,  and  deacons, 
and  preachers. — p.  92.  Stewards  are  to  be  sub- 
ject to  bishops,  presiding  elders,  &c. — p.  168.  The 
same  fact  of  precedence  is  here  observable,  as  m 
the  foregoing  instances.  The  truth  is,  when  a 
bishop  is  present,  he  absorbs  all  the  power  of  pre- 
siding elders  and  ordinary  mmisters,  unless  it  be 
in  some  trifling  instances  where  the  General  Con- 
ference has,  by  special  enactment,  devolved  some 
duty  upon  those  in  charge  of  circuits.  But 
nothing  is  now  recollected  that  is  done  while  the 
bishop  is  present,  that  would  form  an  exception  to 
this  statement.  Now  to  sum  up  ;  when  a  bishop 
comes  to  a  quarterly  conference,  he  possesses  all 
the  authority  of  controlling  the  meeting,  by  virtue 
of  his  general  superintendency,  which  is  made  up 
of  particulars,  of  which  this  is  one.  The  presid- 
ing elder  for  the  time  being  loses  his  authority  by 
the  presence  of  the  man  who  gave  him  his  au- 
thority. All  the  authority  a  presiding  elder  has 
when  the  bishop  is  in  his  district,  is  to  '•'  attend 
HIM." — Dis.  p.  31.  But  when  the  bishop  is  present, 
he  cannot  change,  receive,  or  suspend  preachers  in 
his  district,  unless  by  the  special  permission  or  order 
of  the  bishop. — p .  30.  And  when  a  bishop  comes 
to  a  station,  the  preacher  in  charge  loses  his  au- 
thority in  the  conducting  a  trial,  and  in  ad  other 
instances,  unless  the  General  Conference  has,  by 


FROM  THE   "M.   E.   CHURCH.  129 


positive  euactmeut,  ordered  otherwise.  In  the 
trial  of  members,  the  sole  authority  is  in  the 
bishop  to  preside  if  present :  next  is  the  presidin£» 
elder,  and  then  the  preach'  r  in  charge.  But  of 
right,  the  preacher  in  charge  of  the  circuit  is 
utterly  dispossessed,  if  the  presiding  elder  is 
present,  and  both  of  them  are  without  authority  to 
preside  in  the  trial,  if  the  bishop  be  present.  Now 
see  how  this  might  work  in  the  trial  of  a  member, 
should  a  bi.shop  preside,  and  then  be  president  of 
the  quarterly  conference.  All  questions  of  law 
are  to  be  decided  by  the  president  at  both  trials ; 
and  in  case  of  an  appeal  of  this  nature,  it  might 
be  made  to  the  same  person  at  the  trial,  at  the 
quarterhj  conference,  and  finally  at  the  annual  con- 
ference, should  the  bishop  be  present  and  exercise 
the  authority  with  which  he  is  invested.  And 
tlius,  the  very  object  for  which  an  ai>peal  is  taken 
would  be  defeated ;.  as  it  is  a  question  that  is  not 
debatable,  and  in  the  instances  here  mentioned, 
it  would  be  the  same  man  who  should  decide  in 
all  the  three  cases  of  adjudication. 

Let  it  not  be  said- that  this  absorption  of  power 
is  unjirecedented,  or  too  monstrous  to  ascribe  to 
any  good  man  in  the  M.  E.  Church.  Mr.  Asbury 
formerly  possessed  this  power  and  more  too.  In 
the  bound  minutes  of  1779,  we  find  the  following 
question  and  answer  ■ 

'■  (lues.  13.  How  far  shall  his  (Asbury's)  pow-ei 
extend  ? 

'•AnS.    Ox    HEARING    EVKRY    PREACHER    FOR  AND 


130 


GROUNDS  OF  SECESSION 


AGAINST  WHAT  IS  IN  DEBATE,  THE  RIGHT  Or  DETER- 
MINATION SHALL  REST  WITH  HIM  ACCORDING  TO  THE 
MINUTES." 

8.  The  power  of  presiding  elders,  in  their  dis- 
tricts, while  the  bishops  arc  absent,  is  the  same  as 
that  of  bishops  when  present,  ordaining  excepted. 
They  oversee  the  spiritual  and  temporal  business 
of  the  church  in  the  districts.  They  have  charge 
of  all  the  preachers  and  exhorters  in  the  districts. 
They  can  change,  receive,  and  suspend  preachers 
in  their  districts.  And  they  are  to  take  care  that 
every  part  of  the  Discipline  be  enforced  in  their 
districts;  as  also  to  decide  all  questions  of  law 
in  a  quarterly  meeting  conference.  A  presiding 
elder  is  in  all  cases  the  representative  of  the 
bishop,  and  can  do  all  the  bishop  could,  within 
the  limits  of  his  district,  ordaining  excepted. 

9.  All  the  power  the  lay  members  of  the  M.  E. 
Church  possess,  is  the  power  to  withhold  their 
support  from  the  ministry  and  institutions  of  the 
church,  and,  when  a  man  is  to  be  licensed  as  an 
exhorter  or  preacher,  the  class  or  society  vote  to 
approbate  or  disapprobate,  when  there  is  no  lead- 
ers' meeting  held  in  the  place.  But,  as  in  most 
places  there  are  leaders'  meetings  held,  the  prac- 
tical results  are,  in  most  cases,  they  do  not  vote 
even  here.  And  though  the  laws  of  the  States 
authoritatively  invest  members  of  churches  and 
congregations  with  the  right  of  voting,  in  the 
election  of  trustees  for  holding  churches,  yet  the 
Discipline  provides,  that  in  all  cases,  when  new 


FROM  THE  M.   E.   CHURCH.  131 


boards  of  trustees  are  to  be  created,  it  shall  be 
done  (except  in  those  states  where  the  statutes 
provide  differently)  by  the  appointment  of  the 
preacher  in  charge,  or  the  presiding  elder  of  the 
district. — Dis.  p.  167 

"  We  know  nothing  of  the  right  of  the  society 
to  admit  members  into  church  fellowship ;  and  the 
Methodist  preacher  who  concedes  this  right,  be- 
trays his  trust,  and  should  be  held  amenable  for 
delinquency  to  his  brethren.  We  know  not  if 
this  has  ever  happened  ;  but  Mr.  Lee  speaks  of 
the  contrary  doctrine  as  a  matter  which  is  not 
questionable  :  and  hence  we  have  inferred  that 
he,  at  least,  practised  upon  this  opinion  when  he 
was  a  travelling  preacher ;  and,  as  he  has  done  so 
with  impunity,  if  he  has  done  so  at  all,  we  have 
been  led  to  fear  that  some  portions  of  the  church 
may  he  gradually  sliding  into  a  compromise 
which  would  so  alter  the  relation  between  pastor 
and  people,  as  to  subvert  our  whole  economy." 

"  The  admission  and  expulsion  of  chr.rch  mem- 
bers by  a  vote  of  the  society,  is  as  absurd  in  theo- 
ry, as  it  would  be  ruinous  in  practice." — Editorial, 
Christian  Advocate  and  Journal,  Nov.  25,  1840. 

Here  we  have  the  secret  let  out :  that  if  the 
management  of  church  affairs  are  so  far  under  the 
control  of  the  laity,  as  for  them  to  admit  members 
into  the  church,  it  would  tend  to  "  subvert  our 
whole  economy." 

The  above  contrast  is  presented  to  the  conside- 
ration of  the  thinking  and  considerate,  in  the  hope 


132 


GROUNDS  OF  SECESSION 


that  it  may  awaken  to  open  investigation,  and  as 
constituting  a  part  of  the  radical  difference  be- 
tween the  government  of  tlie  M.  E.  Church  and 
the  primitive  churches.  The  italicizing  is  my  own. 
And  this  subject,  but  a  mere  outhne  of  what  might 
be  exhibited, — a  subject  upon  which  the  author 
has  bestowed  much  thonglit — is  now  submitted 
in  the  hope  that  it  may  render  some  aid  to  those 
who  are  seeking  to  understand  the  character  of 
the  church,  built  upon  the  apostles  and  prophets, 
Jesus  Christ  himself  being  the  chief  corner  stone." 

AN  ARGUMENT  ON  LAYMEN'S  RIGHTS. 

In  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles,  xv.  1 — 31,  we  have 
a  transaction  recorded  which  bears  directly  upon 
the  question.  We  will  not  fill  space  by  quoting 
the  whole  chapter,  and  will  only  state  briefly  the 
principal  points,  referring  to  the  particular  verses 
relied  upon  as  proof. 

1.  An  important  difference  of  opinion  existed 
and  a  discussion  arose  between  the  parties  at  An- 
tioch.  The  main  question  was  whether  or  not 
the  Gentile  converts  were  required  to  be  circum- 
cised, but  this  question  doubtless  wgis  regarded  as 
involving  'the  perpetuity  or  abro^tion  of  the 
whole  Mosaic  Ritual.    Verses  1,  2. 

2.  It  was  determined  that  a  deputation  should 
be  sent  to  Jerusalem  to  lay  the  subject  before  the 
apostles  and  elders.  This  deputation  consisted 
of  "  Paul  and  Barnabas,  and  certain  others  of 


FROM  THE  M.  E.  CHURCH. 


133 


them."  Verse  2.  Who  tliose  certain  otliers  were 
is  not  clear,  but  from  Gal.  ii.  1 — 5,  it  is  probable 
tliat  Titus  was  one  of  them,  who  must  have  been 
a  young  convert  at  this  time.  The  niission  was 
undertaken  at  the  expense  of  the  church,  for  they 
were  "brought  on  their  way  by  the  Church." 
Verse  3. 

3.  "  When  they  were  come  to  Jerusalem,  they 
were  received  by  the  church,  and  of  the  apostles 
and  elders."  Verse  4.  The  church  had  as  much 
to  do  with  their  reception  as  had  the  apostles  and 
elders. 

4.  The  question  was  brought  before  the  apos- 
tles and  elders,  and  the  whole  multitude  for  adju- 
dication. That  it  was  brought  before  the  apostles 
and  elders  is  proved  by  verse  6.  That  it  was 
equally  brought  before  the  whole  church  and  dis- 
cussed by  them  as  by  a  deliberative  body,  is  proved 
by  verse  12.  "Then  all  the  multitude  kept  si- 
lence, and  gave  audience  to  Barnabas  and  Paul." 
That  the  multitude  participated  in  the  discussion, 
is  proved  by  a  comparison  of  verses  7  and  12. 
The  former  says  "there  had  been  much  dispnt- 
ing,"  while  the  latter  says,  "  then  all  the  multitude 
kept  silence."  Their  keeping  silence  in  the  12th 
verse,  is  the  antithesis  of  the  much  discussion  in 
the  7th  verse. 

5.  After  Paul  and  Barnabas  had  concluded  their 
remarks,  James  summed  up  tlie  whole  subject, 
and  stated  his  judgment  in  the  case,  which  ap- 
pears to  have  been  satisfactory  to  all .    Verses  13 


134 


GROUNDS  OF  SECESSION' 


— 21,  but  19  and  20  in  particular.  There  is  the 
same  proof  that  the  church  consented  to  this  de- 
cision  that  there  is  that  the  other  apostles  did. 

6.  They  all  united  in  communicating  their  judg- 
ment to  the  church  at  Antioch.  Verse  22.  "  Then 
pleased  it  the  apostles,  and  elders,  and  the  whole 
Church  to  send  chosen  men  of  their  own  company 
to  Antioch  Avith  Paul  and  Barnabas ;  namely  Ju- 
das, surnamed  Barnabas,  and  Silas,  chief  men 
among  the  brethren.''''  The  whole  church  sent  these 
men  as  much  as  the  apostles  and  elders  did. 

7.  They  all  joined  in  a  written  statement  of  the 
decision,  which  they  sent  by  them.  Verse  23. 
"And  they  wrote  letters  by  them  after  this  man- 
ner :  The  apostles,  and  elders,  and  brethren,  send 
greeting,  unto  the  brethren  which  are  of  the  Gen- 
tiles in  Antioch,  and  Syria,  and  Cilicia."  Note, 
this  letter  was  from  the  brethren  at  Jerusalem  as 
Avell  as  from  the  apostles,  and  was  addressed  to 
the  brethren  at  Antioch,  and  not  to  the  ministers. 

8.  The  deputation,  when  they  arrived  at  An- 
tioch, delivered  the  letter  to  the  church,  who  pro- 
ceeded to  read  it.  Verse  30,  31.  "They  came  to 
Antioch,  and  when  they  had  gathered  the  multi- 
tude together,  they  delivered  the  epistle  :  which 
when  they  had  read,  they  rejoiced  for  the  con- 
solation." In  this  transaction  was  settled  the 
first  great  theological  question  that  came  up  for 
discussion,  after  the  Master  had  retired  from  the 
world  to  his  throne,  and,  in  its  settlement,  it  is 
clear  that  the  laity  had  as  much  to  do  as  did  the 


FROM  THE  M.  E,  CHURCH. 


135 


ministry.  This  fact,  that  the  apostles  who  were 
divinely  inspired  to  settle  the  principles  of  church 
government,  submitted  the  question  to  the  con- 
sideration of  the  brethren,  is  conclusive  evidence 
that  this  was  the  plan  upon  which  the  church 
was  organized,  and  upon  which  it  should  be 
governed.  The  reason  for  such  a  course  now, 
when  ministers  are  not  inspired,  is  much  stronger 
than  it  could  have  been  then,  when  ministers 
were  inspired.  What  right  can  the  ministry  have 
to  take  away  from  the  laity  what  was  so  clearly 
granted  to  them  by  inspired  men,  whose  actions 
are  admitted  to  have  been  authoritative  f  We 
trow  not. 

Acts  xviii.  27.  "And  wlien  he  [ApoUos]  was 
disposed  to  pass  into  Achaia,  the  brethren  wrote, 
exhorting  the  disciples  to  receive  him:  who, 
when  he  was  come,  lielped  them  much  which 
had  believed  through  grace." 

The  letter  here  given  was  a  recommendation 
as  a  Christian  teacher,  and,  in  giving  such  a  letter, 
they  assumed  the  right  of  judging  for  themselves 
of  his  Christian  character  and  of  his  ministerial 
qualifications.  This  right  was  doubtless  assumed 
and  exercised  in  this  case  by  laymen.  There  is 
not  the  slightest  intimation  that  his  was  a  letter 
emanating  from  clerical  authority.  The  letter  was 
also  clearly  addressed  to  laymen,  and  not  to  some 
presiding  minister,  having  "charge  of  all  the 
elders  and  deacons,  travelling  and  local  preachers, 
and  exhorters  in  his  di.strict." 


136  GROUNDS  OF  SECESSION 


2  Cor,  iii.  1.  "Or  need  we  as  some  others, 
epistles  of  commendation  to  you,  or  letters  ol 
commend  from  you  V 

Tliis  text  clearly  proves  two  things,  viz. : — 

1.  Letters  of  commendation  to  and  from 
churches  Avere  necessary  for  some  other  minis 
ters.  The  expression,  "  need  we  as  some  others," 
clearly  proves  that  others  did  need  such  let- 
ters. 

2.  The  right  to  give  and  receive  such  letters 
is  most  clearly  ceded  to  the  church  in  the  text. 
The  apostle  does  not  intimate  that  they  had  not 
a  right  to  give  and  receive  such  letters  Avhen  given 
by  other  churches,  nor  does  he  intimate  that  they 
are  not  necessary  for  "some  others,"  but  only 
intimates  that  such  letters  were  not  necessary  for 
him  and  his  fellow-apostles.  They  Ave  re  com- 
missioned by  Christ,  and  had  the  power  of  work 
ing  other  miracles,  which  was  a  sufhcient  recom- 
mendation wherever  they  went,  but  others  needed 
letters  of  recommendation. 

From  the  two  points  made  out  above,  a  very 
clear  conclusion  follows.  As  such  letters  were 
given  and  received  by  the  apostolic  churches, 
and  a?  the  right  of  giving  and  receiving  xhem  be- 
longed to  the  churches,  it  follows  that  the  local 
churches  had  the  right  of  judging  for  themselves 
on  the  subject  of  ministerial  qualifications  and 
character.  The  very  act  of  recommending  a 
minister,  is  the  act  of  expressing  our  judgment 
concerning  him,  and  the  right  to  do  this  includes 


FROM  THE  M.  E.  CHURCH. 


137 


the  right  ol  judgment  in  the  case.  This  we  see 
originally  belonged  to  laymen. 

1  John  iv.  1.  "  Beloved,  believe  not  every  spirit, 
but  try  the  spirit,  whether  it  be  of  God,  because 
many  false  prophets  are  gone  out  into  the  world." 

Trying  the  spirits  here  clearly  means  judging 
between  true  and  false  teachers.  Those  who  are 
required  to  do  this  must  have  the  right  of  judg- 
ing what  is  truth  and  what  is  error ;  to  them  must 
belong  the  right  of  settling  the  doctrines  of  the 
creed.  But  this  duty  of  judging  between  false 
and  true  teachers,  is,  in  the  text,  clearly  imposed 
upon  laymen,  embracing  those  whom  the  apostle 
calls  little  children,  young  men,  and  fathers. 
Chap.  ii.  12,  13. 

2  John  10.  "If  there  come  any  unto  you,  and 
bring  not  this  doctrine,  receive  him  not  into  your 
house,  neither  bid  him  God  speed." 

.This  text  is  precisely  the  character  of  the  last, 
so  far  as  its  bearing  upon  the  question  is  con- 
cerned. The  duty  enjoined  is,  to  judge  and  reject 
a  false  teacher,  on  account  of  his  defection  in 
doctrine.  This  duty  includes  the  right  of  judging 
what  the  true  doctrine  is,  and  what  is  false  doc- 
trine :  and  as  it  is  here  urged  upon  the  church, 
not  the  ministry,  it  follows  that  the  laity  are 
judges  of  the  doctrines  of  the  Gospel,  and  are 
charged  with  the  important  work  of  preserving 
them  pure. 

Rom.  xvi.  17.  "Now  I  beseech  you,  brethren, 
mark  them  which  cause  divisions  and  offences 
12* 


138  GROUNDS  OP  SECESSION 


contrary  to  the  doctrine  which  ye  have  learned, 
and  avoid  them." 

•  This  text  proves  that  the  power  of  discipline  is 
lodged  with  the  church.  To  mark  and  avoid  in 
the  sense  of  the  text,  must  mean  that  application 
of  discipline  which  separates  offending  members 
from  the  fellowship  of  the  church,  and  this  is  as 
far  as  churcli  discipline  can  go.  Now  as  this  ap- 
plication of  discipline  is  to  be  made  by  the  church, 
as  the  apostle  urges  the  church  to  this  work,  the 
right  and  power  of  discipline  must  be  in  the 
hands  of  the  church,  and  not  in  the  hands  of  the 
ministry. 

1  Cor.  vii.  5.  "Purge  out  therefore  the  old 
leaven,  that  ye  may  be  a  new  lump." 

This  is  a  figurative  expression,  by  which  the 
apostle  absolutely  commanded  them  to  exclude 
from  their  communion  a  certain  corrupt  member. 
What  shows  that  the  power  to  do  it  rested  with 
them,  is  his  severe  rebuke  for  not  having  done  it. 
Their  power  or  right  to  expel  this  corrupt  person, 
did  not  depend  upon  his  command  to  do  it,  be- 
cause, in  connection  with  the  command,  he  finds 
fault  with  them  because  they  had  not  already 
done  it.  This  view  the  preceding  verses  fully 
sustain . 

1  Thes.  ili.  6.  "Now  we  command  you,  bre- 
thren, in  the  name  of  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  that 
ye  withdraw  yourselves  from  every  brother  that 
walketh  disorderly." 

Withdrawing  from  a  brother  means  nothing 


FROM  THE  M.  E.  CHURCH.  139 


more  nor  less  than  excluding  him  from  our  church- 
fellowship.  This  the  brethren,  the  church,  were 
required  to  do,  and  of  course  they  must  haVe 
held  the  power  of  discipline  in  their  o^\^^  hands. 

The  above  texts  have  been  produced  as  speci- 
mens of  the  many  which  teach  that  each  local 
church  possesses  the  right  and  power  of  disci- 
pline, and  are  boiuid  to  exercise  it.  These  Scrip- 
tures teach  that  the  church  is  held  responsible  for 
the  truth  of  the  Gospel  preached  among  them, 
and  for  the  purity  of 'their  own  body,  which  could 
not  be  true  without  the  right  of  choosing  their 
own  teachers,  and  of  disciplining  theii  own 
members. 

We  will  conclude  ihis  branch  of  our  investiga- 
tion with  a  few  extracts  from  some  principal 
authors,  ^\'e  will  introduce  a  few  quotations 
from  a  work  entitled  "  A  Church  without  a  Bish- 
op," by  Lyman  Coleman,  author  of  "Antiquities 
of  the  Christian  Church." 

'•  The  brethren  chose  their  own  officers  from 
among  themselves.  Or  if  in  the  first  organization 
of  the  churches,  their  officers  were  appointed  by 
the  apostles,  it  was  with  the  approbation  of  the 
members  of  the  same." — Pages  12,  20. 

"  So  universal  was  the  right  of  suffrage,  and  so 
reasonable,  that  it  attracted  tlie  notice  of  the  Em- 
peror, Alexander  Severus,  who  reigned  from  A.  D. 
222  to  235.  In  imitation  of  the  custom  of  Chris- 
tians and  Jews  in  the  appointment  of  their  priests, 
as  he  says,  he  gave  the  people  the  right  of  reject- 


140 


GROUNDS  OF  SECESSION. 


ing  the  appointment  of  any  procurator,  or  chief 
president  of  the  provinces,  whom  he  might  ap- 
ploint  to  such  office.  Their  votes,  however,  in 
these  cases,  were  not  merely  testimonial,  but 
really  judicial  and  elective." 

"  There  are  on  record  instances  in  which  the 
people  of  their  own  accord,  and  by  acclamation, 
elected  individuals  to  the  office  of  bishop  orpresby- 
ter,  without  any  previous  nomination.  Ambrose, 
Bishop  of  Milan,  was  elected  in  this  manner,  A. 
D.  374."— Page  67. 

Our  author  gives  a  list  of  others  elected  in  the 
same  way,  which  we  omit.  He  makes  the  fol- 
lowing quotations  from^Moslieim's  "  Dissertations 
Sacra:,"  a  work  which  we  believe  has  never  been 
published  in  this  country. 

"  This  power  of  appointing  their  elders  con- 
tinued to  be  exercised  by  the  members  of  the 
church  at  large,  as  long  as  primitive  manners 
were  retained  entire." — Page  70. 

"  The  Bishop  began  in  the  third  century,  to  ap- 
point his  own  deacons  at  pleasure,  and  other  in- 
ferior orders  of  clergy.  In  other  appointments, 
also,  his  efforts  began  to  disturb  the  freedom  of  the 
elections,  and  direct  them  agreeably  to  his  own 
will.  And  yet  Cyprian,  only  about  fifty  years  be- 
fore, apologized  to  the  laity  and  clergy  of  his  dio- 
cese, for  appointing  Auretius  to  the  office  of 
reader.  In  justification  of  this  measure,  he 
pleads  the  extraordinary  virtues  of  the  candidate, 
the  urgent  necessity  of  the  case,  and  the  impos- 


FROM  THE  M.  E.  CHURCH. 


141 


sibility  of  consulting  them,  as  he  was  wont  to  do 
on  all  such  occasions,"    Page  71,  72. 

"The  Emperor,  Valantiniau  III.  complains  of 
Hilary  of  Aries,  that  he  unworthily  ordained  some 
in  direct  opposition  to  the  will  of  the  people ;  and 
when  they  refused  those  whom  they  had  not  cho- 
sen, that  he  contracted  an  aimed  body,  and  by 
military  power  forcibly  thrust  into  office  the 
ministers  of  the  Gospel  of  peace." — Page  77/ 

"  Leo  the  Great,  A.  D.  450,  asserts  the  right  of 
the  people  to  elect  their  spiritual  rulers." — lb. 

"  TertuUian  describes  such  assemblies  [synods] 
as  bodies  representative  of  the  whole  church." 
—Page  115. 

Our  author  makes  the  following  quotation  from 
Mosheim's  work  referred  to. 

"  In  the  mfancy,  indeed,  ot  councils,  the  Bishops 
did  not  scruple  to  acknowledge  that  they  appear- 
ed there  merely  as  the  ministers  or  legates  of  their 
respective  churches;  and  that  they  were,  in  fact, 
nothing  more  than  representatives  acting  from  in- 
structions, but  it  was  not  long  before  this  humble  • 
language  began  by  little  and  little,  to  exchange 
for  a  loftier  tone. — They  at  length  took  upon 
themselves  to  assert  that  they  were  the  legitimate 
successors  of  the  apostles  themselves,  and  might, 
consequently,  of  their  own  proper  authority,  dic- 
tate laws  to  their  Christian  flock." — Page  115. 

The  writer  makes  the  following  quotations 
from  the  learned  author  Neander  ; 

"  From  the  nature  of  the  religious  life  and  of 


142  GROUNDS  OF  SECESSION 


the  Christian  Church,  it  is  hardly  possible  to 
draw  the  inference,  naturally  that  the  govern- 
ment shonld  have  been  entrusted  to  the  hands  of 
a  single  one.  The  monarchical  form  of  government 
accords  not  with  the  spirit  of  the  Christian  Church.'' 
—Page  19. 

"  Riddle  gives  the  following  sketch  of  the  con- 
stitution and  government  of  the  church  at  the 
beginning  of  the  second  century.  '  The  subordi- 
nate government,  &c.,  of  each  particular  church 
was  vested  in  itself;  that  is  to  say,  the  whole 
body  elected  its  ministers  and  officers,  and  was 
consulted  concerning  all  matters  of  importance. 
This  is  said  of  the  church  at  the  close  of  the  first 
centuiy." — lb. 

"The  mode  of  appointing  bishops  and  presby- 
ters," says  Riddle,  "  has  been  repeatedly  changed. 
Election  by  the  people,  for  instance,  has  been 
discontiruied." — Page  70. 

« It  is  clearly  asserted  by  Dr.  Pin,  that  in  Rome 
and  Carthage,  no  one  could  be  expelled  from  the 
"church,  or  restored  again,  except  with  the  con- 
sent of  the  people." — Page  102. 

"  Valesius,  the  learned  commentator  on  Euse- 
bius,  says  that  the  people's  suffrages  were  re- 
quired when  any  one  was  to  be  received  into  the 
Church,  who  for  any  fault,  had  been  excommuni- 
cated. This  is  said  of  the  usages  of  the  Church 
in  the  third  century." — lb. 

We  might  multiply  these  extracts  to  almost  any 
extent,  but  will  close  where  we  are.   Mr.  Cole- 


FKOM  THE  M.  E.  CHURCH. 


143 


man,  from  whose  work  we  have  taken  the  Uberty 
to  make  such  copious  extracts,  is  versed  in  Orien- 
tal Literature,  and  has  spent  some  years  in  Ger- 
many amid  ihe  musty  records  of  lier  literary  in- 
stitutions, as  his  work  gives  ample  proof.  It 
should  be  remarked  that  all  the  extracts  we  have 
made,  are  sustained  by  references  to  the  proper 
authorities,  but  as  these  are  works  unknown  to 
the  common  reader,  and  several  of  them  m  other 
languages,  we  have  omitted  the  references.  Mr. 
Coleman's  book  is  before  the  public,  and  if  he  has 
not  quoted  his  learned  authorities  correctly,  let 
him  be  called  to  an  account,  by  the  Literati, 

Dr.  Mosheim  is  endorsed  by  Mr.  Watson  as 
follows : 

"  The  best  ecclesiastical  historians  have  show, 
ed  that  through  the  greater  part  of  the  second 
century,  the  Christian  Churches  were  indepen- 
dent of  each  other.  Each  Christian  assembly 
says  Mosheim,  was  a  little  state  governed  by  its 
own  laws,  which  <were  enacted,  or  at  least  ap- 
proved by  the  society." — Biblical  Dictiomry — Ar- 
ticle "Church." 

Mr.  Watson  is  as  high  authority  as  can  be  quo- 
ted from  among  English  Methodist  authors,  and 
he  goes  quite  as  far  as  we  do  on  the  subject  of 
laymen's  rights  and  powers,  as  will  be  seen  from 
the  following  extracts : 

"This  declaration  as  to  doctrine,  in  modern 
times  is  made  by  confessions  or  articles  of  faith, 
in  which,  if  fundamental  error  is  found,  the  evil 


144 


GROUNDS  OF  SECESSION 


rests  upon  the  heads  of  that  church  collectively, 
and  upon  the  members  individually,  every  one  of 
whom  is  bound  to  try  all  doctrines  by  the  Holy 
Scriptures,  and  cannot  support  an  acknowledged 
system  of  error  without  gmh."— Institutes  tn  one 
vol.  page  422. 

This  necessarily  involves  the  right  of  lay  dele- 
gation in  all  assemblies  where  doctrines  and  rules 
of  government  are  settled .  Our  author  says  again 
of  the  power  of  pastors. 

"  We  have  already  said,  that  the  members  of  a 
church,  although  they  have  no  right  to  obstract 
the  just  exercise  of  this  right,  have. a  right  to  pre- 
vent its  unworthy  exercise." — Page  423 . 

This  is  granting  all ;  for  the  right  to  prevent  an 
unworthy  exercise  of  power,  includes  the  right 
of  determining  when  it  is  justly  and  when  it  is 
unworthily  exercised.  Now  if  the  laity  have  the 
right  of  judging  of  the  conduct  of  their  rulers,  and 
determining  when  they  act  right  and  when  they 
act  wrong,  and  of  interdicting  those  acts  which 
they  believe  to  be  wrong,  it  is  all  that  we  con- 
tend for. 

In  Mr.  Wesley's  Journal  for  January  10,  174G, 
we  find  the  following  : 

"  I  set  out  for  Bristol.  On  the  road  I  read  over 
Lord  King's  account  of  the  primitive  church.  In 
spite  of  the  vehement  prejudice  of  my  education, 
I  was  ready  to  believe  that  this  was  a  fair  and  im- 
partial draught ;  but  if  so,  it  would  follow  that  bish- 
ops and  presbyters  are  essentially  of  one  order; 


FROM  THE  M.  E.  CHURCH.  145 


aud  that,  originally,  every  Christian  congregation 
was  a  church  independent  of  all  others." 
»  Tliese  extracts  might  be  swelled  into  a  volume; 
but  as  copious  extracts  have  been  made  from  Lord 
King  and  others,  in  other  parts  of  this  work,  they 
axe  omitted  under  this  head.  • 

From  the  above,  it  appears  that  the  govern- 
ment of  the  M.  E.  Church  is  as  contrary  to  the 
usages  of  the  primitive  church,  as  it  is  to  the 
principles  laid  down  iu  the  Holy  Scriptures.  It  is 
not  pretended  that  any  form  of  government  is  ex- 
pressly laid  down  in  the  Scriptures;  nevertheless 
the  Scriptures  abound  with  elements  or  principles  of 
church  government.  The  M.  E.  form  of  govern- 
ment is  a  gross  violation  of  those  principles. 

The  Episcopals  pretend  that  the  great  success 
which  has  attended  their  system  of  operations  is 
evidence  of  the  righteousness  and  utility  of  Epis- 
copacy. "  It  works  well" — ^^he  Lord  blesses  it."  So 
did  that  which  is  now  the  Apocalyptic  beast,  once 
work  well.  The  Church  of  Kome  was  once  pure 
— and  much  purer,  when  it  was  the  age  of  the 
M.  E.  church,  than  the  M.  E.  church  now  is. 
None  but  those  blinded  by  ignorance,  prejudice, 
interest,  or  the  love  of  sect,  can  fail  to  see  the 
seeds  of  Poperij  in  the  M.  E.  polity.  Indeed,  those 
seeds  are  pretty  well  sprouted  already.  The 
church  is  not  yet  sixty  years  old,  and  Methodist 
Episcopal  Bishops  have  more  power  in  some  re- 
spects, than  Roman  Catholic  Bishops!  And  the 
history  of  the  last  seven  years  teaches  us  that 
13 


146 


GROUNDS  OF  SECESSION 


these  bishops  have  still  an  open  field.  They  may 
assume  almost  any  jirerogative,  and  tTie  General 
Conference  will  sanction  their  assumptions .'  And 
why  not  ?  Of  what  is  the  General  Conference 
composed  1  Perhaps  one-half  are  presiding  el- 
ders— creatures  of  the  bishop  ;  and  j^erhaps  one- 
eighth  are  looking  for  some  General  Conference 
office ;  and  then  not  a  few  of  the  younger  mem- 
bers are  looking  for  the  presiding  elder's  office ; 
and  more  are  looking  for  the  bishopric  than  ever 
can  wear  the  triple  crown.  Is  it  therefore  strange 
that  a  General  Conference,  composed  of  such 
materials,  should  sustain  all  Episcopal  innova- 
tions and  assumptions,  and  even  authorize  the 
bishops,  by  legal  enactments,  to  continue  their 
encroachments  1 

Never  was  there  an  ecclesiastical  system  so 
well  contrived,  by  the  dependence  of  all  its  parts 
upon  a  great  central  wheel,  to  accumulate  power 
and  put  down  every  opposing  thing,  as  that  of 
METHODIST  EPISCOPACY.  Hence  its  danger- 
ous tendency,  both  to  our  civil  and  religious  in- 
stitutions. 

If  revivals,  or  the  success  of  the  M.  E.  church, 
prove  the  government  to  be  right,  then  it  would 
prove  absolute  contradictions;  for  while  it  would 
prove  aristocracy  to  be  right  in  the  M.  E.  church, 
it  would  as  clearly  prove  republicanism  to  be 
right  in  the  Presbyterian,  Baptist,  Methodist  Pro- 
testant, and  other  chnrche.«,  for  these  all  have  re- 
vivals and  success,  as  well  as  the  M.  E.  church. 


FROM  THE  M.  E.  CHURCH. 


141 


Moreover,  if  this  is  a  good  argument  in  favor  of 
any  peculiar  form  of  church  government,  it  would 
be  equally  good  in  favor  of  doctrines ;  hence  it 
would  prove  Calvinism  right,  Arminianism  right, 
Campbellism,  right,  and  every  other  ism,  and  by 
proving  too  much,  destroys  itself,  and  proves 
nothing  at  all.  But  the  fact  is,  this  has  not  been 
the  ground  of  their  success;  uo  one  has  ever 
been  awakened,  or  converted,  or  joined  the 
church,  because  of  the  government,  but  have 
been  influenced  in  this  by  their  doctrines,  the  in- 
dustry of  their  ministry,  and  the  piety  of  the 
church,  while  some,  it  is  to  be  feared,  have  joined 
the  church  from  motives  less  praiseworthy  than 
the  above. 

SECTION  VII. 

PROSPECT  OF  REFORM. 

There  is  no  prospect  that  this  church  will  give 
up  slavery  till  forced  to  do  so.  As  to  her  govern- 
ment, all  efforts  at  modification  and  improve- 
ment have  proved  abortive ;  and  the  Episcoiiacy 
of  the  church  never  was  established  on  so  firm  a 
basis  as  at  present. 

Attempts  at  reform  were  commenced  about  six 
years  after  the  church  was  organized. 

Two  things  have  been  aimed  at  in  all  efforts  at 
reform, — one  has  been  to  curtail  the  Bishop's 
power,  and  the  other  to  bring  the  influence  of  the 
lahy  into  the  councils  of  the  church 


148  GROUNDS  OF  S  .  CESSION 


It, has  always  been  seen  by  a  large  portion  of 
the  travelling  preachers,  that  if  the  presiding  el- 
ders were  elected  by  their  suffrages,  and  associat- 
ed with  the  Bishops  by  right  in  making  out  the 
appointments,  it  would  abridge  the  Bishop's 
power  over  them,  and  afford  them  some  little  voice 
in  determining  their  own  fields  of  labor.  To 
secure  this  point,  therefore,  has  been  an  object 
with  many  of  the  preachers,  almost  from  the  first. 

The  secession  that  took  place  in  1792,  with 
James  O'Kelly  at  its  head,  was  in  consequence  of 
the  unlimited  power  of  the  Bishop  in  stationing 
the  preachers.  It  was  a  very  small  abridgement 
of  (he  Bishop's  prerogative  that  Mr.  O'Kelly  and 
his  friends  asked,  but  the  General  Conference  re- 
fused to  grant  it.  The  restriction  desired  was  in 
the  following  words : 

"  After  the  Bishops  appoint  the  preachers  at  the 
conference  to  their  several  circuits,  if  any  one 
thinks  himself  injured  by  the  appointment,  he 
shall  have  liberty  to  appeal  to  the  Conference  and 
state  his  objections ;  and  if  the  Conference  ap- 
prove his  objections,  the  Bishop  shall  appoint  him 
to  another  circuit." 

After  a  debate  of  three  days  on  this  proposition, 
it  was  lost ;  probably  through  the  great  influence 
that  Bishop  Asbury  held  over  the  preachers,  as  it 
was  understood  that  he  was  decidedly  hostile  to 
the  measure. 

At  the  Conference  of  1800,  another  attempt  was 
made  to  abridge  the  stationing  power,  by  asso- 


ra.jM  THE  M.  E.  CHURCH. 


149 


ciatiiig  a  committee  of  preachers  with  the  Bishop, 
ill  making  out  the  appointments .  This  also  failed- 
The  same  question  was  introduced  into  thf  Confer- 
ence of  1812,  and  lost  by  only  three  votes. 

In  1816,  a  resolution  was  introduced  into  the 
Conference  to  make  the  presiding  elders  elective, 
and  to  constitute  them  a  council  to  assist  the 
Bishop  in  stationing  the  preachers.  This  was 
also  lost. 

The  same  resolution,  Avith  slight  modifications, 
Avas  brought  forward  in  1820  and  passed  by  quite 
a  majority.  After  its  adoption,  however,  the  Rev. 
Joshua  Soule  who  had  just  been  elected  to  the 
Episcopal  office  refused  to  act  under  the  restric- 
tion, and  consequently  resigned  hi.s  office.  Bish- 
op McKendree  joined  with  Mr.  Soule  in  his  oppo- 
sition to  the  measure,  and  through  their  joint  influ- 
ence they  succeeded,  at  length,  in  bringing  over 
a  majority  to  their  side,  and  obtained  a  suspen- 
sion of  the  resolutions  for  four  j^ears.  In  1824, 
their  suspension  was  continued,  and  at  the  Gen- 
eral Conference  of  1828,  they  were  rescinded.* 

Thus  an  efibrt  to  abridge  the  powers  of  the 
Bishops,  and  continued  for  more  than  thirty  years, 
was  finally  defeated  by  the  Bishops  themselves .' 

This  efi"ort  was  renewed  at  the  last  General 
Conference  (1840),  but  met  with  its  usual  fate. 
The  disposition  on  the  part  of  the  Conference  to 
weaken  any  of  the  Episcopal  functions,  has 

*  For  the  validity  of  the  facts  here  stated,  see  Bangs' 
Histoiy,  Vol.  II.  p.  330  and  onwaid. 

13* 


150 


GROUNDS  OF  SECESSION 


grown  less  and  less  from  the  time  that  McKendree 
aud  Soule  took  a  stand  for  themselves  and  their 
successors  in  1820. 

There  never  has  been  a  period  in  the  history  of 
the  church  when  the  laity  have  been  universally 
satisfied  with  its  government.  Several  strenuous 
efforts  have  been  made  by  the  laity,  at  different 
times,  to  obtain  their  just  rights — but  all  to  no 
purpose.    Secession  has  been  their  only  remedy. 

The  secession  from  the  church  that  took  place 
in  1828,  was  preceded  by  an  energetic  struggle 
for  reform  on  the  part  of  a  large  number  of  local 
preachers  and  laymen,  together  with  some  few 
travelling  preachers.  Of  course  the  latter  class, 
in  any  such  reform,  will  be  always  small,  as  they 
are  the  party  interested  in  sustaining  the  "  ancient 
regime"  of  priestly  prerogatives. 

The  reformers  at  the  time  alluded  to,  commenced 
their  discussions  in  favor  of  the  rights  of  the 
laity,  first  in  the  "Wesleyan  Repository,"  and 
afterwards  in  the  "  Mutual  Rights."  They  argued 
strenuously  against  the  Episcopal  form  of  church 
government,  and  insisted  on  a  lay  representation 
in  the  General  Conference.  Memorials  were  sent 
up  to  that  body  both  in  1824  and  1828,  to  secure 
for  the  laity  a  share  in  its  deliberations.  But  it 
was  like  asking  the  despot  to  yield  his  sceptre  in 
favor  of  his  vassals.  In  the  report  which  the 
Conference  made  on  the  subject  of  the  memorials 
in  1824,  they  modestly  reply  to  the  petitioners, 


FROM  THE  M.  E.  CHURCH. 


151 


"  Pardon  us  if  we  know  no  such  rights — if  ■wk 
comprehend  no  such  privileges." 

At  the  next  Conference  (1828)  the  injured  peo- 
ple made  another  rally,  and  once  more  laid  their 
grievances  before  the  clerical  judicatory.  In 
answer  to  their  claim,  the  Conference  deny  that 
the  right  of  the  laity  to  representation  is  a  natural 
right,  because,  as  they  affirm,  "  the  foundation  of 
their  rights  in  ecclesiastical  bodies  rests  on  a  dif- 
ferent basis."  They  also  deny  that  it  is  an  "  ac- 
quired right"  which  they  are  entitled  to,  either  on 
the  ground  "  of  becoming  Christians  or  of  becom- 
ing Methodists."  And  as  the  right,  if  it  exists  at 
all,  must  be  either  natural  or  acquired,  therefore 
they  gravely  conclude  that  no  such  right  exists. 

It  was  with  such  logic  that  they  justified  ihem- 
eelves  in  the  exercise  of  arbitrary  power,  and 
resisted  the  claim  of  inalienable  right  on  the  part 
of  the  people. 

After  this  defeat  of  liberty  in  1828,  little  was 
said  or  done  by  the  disappointed  and  exhausted 
people  to  gain  their  right,  until  the  Conference  of 
1840,  when  petitions  again  flowed  in  upon  this 
subject.  But  the  Conference  had  become  so  con- 
fident of  its  authority,  so  callous  to  the  claims  of 
justice,  and  so  void  of  all  sense  of  religious  free- 
dom, that  it  did  not  give  the  memorials  a  respect- 
ful consideration,  nor  deem  the  petitioners  worthy 
of  an  honorable  answer.  It  is  true  the  petitions 
were  referred  to  a  committee  and  were  reported 
on.   But  such  was  the  manner  of  then-  reference 


152 


GROUNDS  OF  SECESSION 


(having  been  first  laid  on  the  table),  and  such  the 
report  upon  them  (consisting  of  a  peremptory 
refusal  of  the  prayer,  accompanied  with  a  reflec- 
tion upon  the  manner  in  which  the  memorials  had 
originated),  that  the  whole  subject  was  treated 
with  utter  contempt. 

This  treatment  has  resulted  in  repeated  seces- 
sions. Dr.  Bangs  tells  us,  in  the  History  of  which 
he  is  the  author,  that  in  1791  (about  six  years 
after  the  organization  of  the  church),  the  Rev. 
Wm.  Hammet,  a  very  popular  preacher,  became 
dissatisfied,  and  withdrew  with  a  party  from  the 
church.  He  passes  over  this  secession  very 
rapidly,  leaving  us  to  guess  at  the  probable  number 
of  the  seceders.  About  a  year  after  this,  accord- 
ing to  the  same  author.  Rev.  J.  O'Kelly,  with  a 
number  of  travelling  and  local  preachers,  left  the 
church  on  account  of  their  dissatisfaction  with 
the  power  lodged  in  the  hands  of  the  Bishops 
and  presiding  elders.  "In  the  latter  part  of  1793," 
says  the  Dr.,  "  they  began  to  form  societies,  and 
hundreds  of  the  people  were  induced  to  forsake 
the  M.  E.  church,  so  that  in  some  places  whole 
societies  were  broken  up And  he  tells  us  that 
this  disaffection  was  not  confined  to  Virginia,  the 
place  of  Mr.  O'Kelly's  residence,  but  extended 
also  into  North  Carolina.  Here,  then,  in  about 
eight  years  after  the  organization  of  the  M.  E. 
church.  Dr.  Bangs  tells  us  of  two  very  important 
secessions  on  account  of  the  odium  of  the  gov- 
ernment. 


FROM  THE  M.  E.  CHURCH. 


153 


The  next  secession  that  he  mentions,  took  place 
in  1813.  This,  he  tells  us,  was  composed  of  local 
preachers  and  laymen;  several  of  the  former,  and 
a  considerable  number  of  the  latter.  This  body, 
which  originated  in  New  England,  under  the 
name  of  "  Reformed  Methodists,"  the  Dr.  tells  us, 
"  has  long  ceased  to  exist."  On  what  authority  he 
makes  this  assertion,  I  know  not ;  but  I  do  know 
that  the  "  Reformed  Methodist  church"  still  flour- 
ishes, and  numbers  in  its  communion  about  fifty 
ordained,  and  twenty-five  licensed  preachers,  ana 
two  or  three  thousand  members. 

The  next  prominent  secession  took  place  in 
1827-8.  The  seceders  organized  under  the  name 
of  the  "Methodist  Protestant  Church."  Some 
thousands  soon  gathered  to  their  standard,  and 
at  the  present  time  they  number  about  sixty  thou- 
sand members. 

Since  that  time,  a  multitude  of  smaller  separa- 
tions from  the  church  have  taken  place,  besides 
a  host  of  individual  withdrawals,  both  from 
among  the  ministers  and  laity. 

In  consequence  of  the  pro-slavery  character  of 
the  M.  E.  Church,  and  also  the  oppressive  and 
unscriptural  character  of  her  government,  after 
long  and  prayerful  deliberation,  in  November,  1842. 
Rev.  Messrs.  J.  Horton,  L.  R.  Sunderland  and  0. 
Scott  publicly  withdrew  from  the  M.  E.  church, 
and  started  a  new  paper  called  the  True  We.sley- 
an.  The  second  number  of  this  paper  contained 
the  withdrtiwal  of  Rev.  Luther  Lee,  and  the  3d 


154 


GROUNDS  OP  SECESSION 


number,  that  of  Rev.  L.  C.  Matlack,  one  of  the 
M.  E.  stationed  preachers  in  the  city  of  Boston. 
And  from  that  time  to  the  present,  not  a  week,  j 
beUeve,  has  passed,  but  has  brought  to  the  Wes- 
leyan  office  the  news  of  secessions  either  from 
the  ministry  or  membersliip  of  the  M.  E.  church, 
and  generally  from  both. 

A  convention  was  called  at  the  city  of  Utica, 
N.  Y.,  in  the  month  of  May,  1843,  of  ministers  and 
laymen,  which  formed  the  "  Wesleyan  Methodist 
Connection  of  America."  This  connection  ex- 
tends to  every  free  state  and  territory  in  the  Union. 
It  has  ten  annual  conferences,  with  from  500  to 
600  preachers,  and  about  17,000  members ! 

It  is  but  just  to  remark,  that  previotisly  to  the 
secession  of  Horton,  Sunderland  and  Scott,  a  local 
secession  had  taken  place  in  Utica,  N.  Y.,  another 
in  Cleveland,  0.;  and  also  pretty  extensive  se- 
cessions in  Michigan.  Our  brethren  in  Michigan 
had  formed  themselves  into  an  annual  conference, 
and  were  in  successful  operation  previously  to 
the  above-named  secession.  They  numbered,  at 
the  time  of  the  Utica  Convention,  over  twenty 
preachers,  and  about  a  thousand  members.  They 
now  constitute  a  very  important  branch  of  the 
Wesleyan  Methodist  Connection  of  America. 

The  Wesleyan  Connection  is  now  in  a  state  of 
great  prosperity,  and  new  recruits  are  weekly 
coming  to  us  from  the  old  church. 

There  are  not  less  than  one  hundred  thousand 
Methodists  in  ihe  United  States,  under  various 


FROM  THE  M.  E.  CHURCH. 


155 


names,  who  stand  disconnected  with  the  M.  E. 
Church,  and  in  hostility  to  her  government  Such 
an  amount  of  dissatisfaction  and  disrujition  is 
without  a  parallel  in  the  history  of  any  other 
cliurch  in  this  country.  And  let  it  be  noticed,  too, 
tliat  these  secessions  have  taken  place  notwith- 
standing the  strong  bond  of  union  calculated  to 
bind  the  Methodist  body  together,  growing  out  of 
unity  of  faith,  homogeneousness  of  usuage  and  re- 
ligious habit,  strong  attachment  to  the  early  pio- 
neers of  the  cause,  and  endearing  relations, 
strengthened  by  a  tliousaud  dehghtful  considera- 
tions. 

With  what  expulsive  power,  therefore,  must  a 
system  operate,  that  can  sunder  such  bonds  of 
union,  and  throw  off  thousands  and  tens  of  thou- 
sands from  their  connection  with  it !  Must  not 
such  a  system  be  radically  and  necessarily  wrong  ? 


SECTION  VIII. 

LOCAL  PREACHERS. 

•'If  a  local  preacher  be  distressed  in  his  tempo- 
ral circumstances  on  account  of  his  services  in 
the  circuit,  he  may  apply  to  the  quarterly  meet- 
ing conference,  who  may  give  him  what  relief 
they  judge  proper,  after  the  allowance  of  the 
travelling  preachers  and  their  wives,  and  all  other 
regular  allowances  are  discharged." 


156 


GROUNDS  OP  SECESSION 


Who  can  mark  the  terms  of  this  provision,  and 
not  pronounce  it  a  monstrous  outrage  upon  justice, 
and  an  aggravating  insult  to  misfortune  ?  One 
would  have  thought  that  the  conference  which 
adopted  it  would  have  blushed  for  very  shame  in 
the  act.  It  is,  however,  but  another  proof  of  the 
heartless  and  merciless  character  of  absolute 
power.  Mark ;  in  the  case  alluded  to  in  the  pro- 
vision^ it  is  admitted  that  the  local  preacher  is 
"distressed  in  his  temporal  circumstances  on  ac- 
count of  service  in  the  circuit."  This,  of  course, 
would  give  him  a  claim  in  right,  paramount  to 
the  claims  of  all  others  not  thus  afflicted.  Yet  he 
can  claim  nothing.  "  He  may  apply  to  the  quarterly 
meeting  conference,  who  may  give  what  relief 
they  judge  proper,  AFTER  the  allowance  of  the 
travelling  -preachers  and  of  their  wives,  and  ALL 
OTHER  regular  allowances  are  discharged  !"  If 
there  is  anything  left,  the  conference  "  may  give 
what  relief  they  judge  proper." 

Thus  we  see  that  the  travelling  preacher  must 
first  receive  his  allowance,  however  comfortable 
his  circumstances  may  be,  while  the  local  preach- 
er, who  "  has  broke  down  under  excessive  labors 
in  the  circuit,"  and  is  "  distressed  in  his  temporal 
circumstances,"  can  receive  nothing,  unless  there 
should  be  a  surj)lus  "  after  all  other  regular  claims 
are  discharged,"  and  the  conference  should  "judge 
proper"  to  bestow  the  fragments  of  its  funds  upon 
him.   Alas  !  for  the  poor  man,  even  on  this  ten- 


FROM  THE  M.  E.  CHURCH. 


157 


ure  ;  for  it  is  seldom  that  all  the  "  regular  allow- 
auces  are  discharged." 

In  concluding  this  brief  notice  of  the  local  min- 
istry, I  would  say,  that  though  they  are  thus  sub- 
ordinated to  the  ruling  hierarchy,  some  of  the 
most  talented,  pious,  and  liberty-loving  men  are 
found  in  their  ranks.  They  have  always  furnish- 
ed a  large  proportion  of  the  leading  spirits  who 
have  undertaken  reformatory  measures  in  the 
church,  though  it  is  to  be  regretted  that  many  of 
them  are  either  too  insensible  to  their  own  con- 
dition, or  too  regardless  of  their  own  rights  and 
responsibilities,  to  make  the  necessary  efforts  to 
pluck  themselves  and  the  church  from  the  grasp 
of  a  spiritual  despotism.  Six  thousand  local 
preachers,  with  such  proportion  of  the  laity  as 
they  might  secure  to  their  cause,  would  shake  the 
fabric  of  Methodist  Episcopacy  to  its  founda- 
tions. 


SECTION  IX. 

INFLUENCE  OF  THE  METHODIST  EPISCOPAL  SYSTEM  ON 
THE  REPUBLIC. 

No  one,  I  think,  can  have  failed  to  see,  during 
the  course  of  this  investigation,  that  republican- 
ism and  the  Methodist  Episcopal  economy  are 
perfect  antagonists.  While  republicanism  recog- 
nizes tlie  right  of  the  people  to  frame  the  govern- 
14 


158 


GROUNDS  OF  SECESSION 


ment under  which  they  are  to  live,  we  have  seen 
the  government  of  the  M.  E.  Church  organized  ex- 
dusively  by  the  travelling  preachers,  without  even 
consulting  the  laity  in  respect  to  it.  While  re- 
publicanism provides  for  the  frequent  election  of 
law-makers,  by  the  voice  of  the  citizens,  Metho- 
dist Episcopacy  invests  the  law-making  power 
in  the  travelling  clergy,  by  a  provision  unalter- 
able, except  by  the  travelling  preachers  themselves.' 
In  a  republic,  the  people  also  elect  their  executive 
and  judicial  officers  :  but  the  conference  preach- 
ers in  the  M.  E.  Church  have  usurped  both  these 
departments  of  resposibility  and  power.  In  a  re 
public,  the  public  monies  and  public  edifices  are 
under  the  supervision  of  the  sovereign  people ; 
but  the  vast  funds  of  the  M.  E.  Church,  together 
with  the  houses  of  worship,  with  a  few  ex- 
ceptions, are  under  the  absolute  control  of  her 
regular  ministry.  In  a  republic,  the  people 
choose  their  own  public  servants;  but  the  Me- 
thodist societies  are  obliged  to  receive  such 
teachers  as  the  bishops  may  see  fit  to  send  them. 
In  a  republic,  a  man  is  tried  for  an  alleged 
offence,  by  a  jury  empannelled  upon  just  prin- 
ciples; but  in  the  M.  E.  Church,  the  stationed 
preacher  tries  the  accused  member  by  a  committee 
of  his  own  selecting. 

This  series  of  particulars,  showing  the  antago- 
nistic character  of  Methodist  Episcopacy  to  re- 
publican principles,  might  be  greatly  extended ; 
but  it  is  by  no  means  necessary,  since  the  most 


FROM  THE  M.  E.  CHURCH.  159 


superficial  observer  cannot  fail  to  see  that  it  has 
no  one  feature  compatible  with  the  civil  policy 
of  our  country.  Wh.it,  then,  must  be  the  mfluence 
of  this  ecclesiastical  superstructure  on  the  Ameri- 
can Republic  1  ^lust  not  its  legitimate  tendency 
be  dangerous  and  destructive  1  With  its  eleven 
hundred  thousand  members,  its  ten  thousand  preach- 
ers, its  million  and  a  half  of  supporters,  its  central 
organs  of  information,  its  million  of  money,  its 
archly  constructed  machinery,  set  in  motion  by 
the  great  central  wheel  of  the  General  Conference, 
and  extending  its  influence,  by  means  of  a  thou- 
sand subordinate  wheels,  to  every  society  and 
class  throughout  the  Union,  together  with  its  ab- 
solute head  in  the  persons  of  the  bishops,  render 
the  Methodist  Episcopal  organization  a  most 
dangerous  institution  to  the  liberties  of  the  nation. 
It  is,  indeed,  far  more  dangerous  than  Catholi- 
cism itself;  for  the  corrupt  and  liberty-crushing 
character  of  that  organization  has  long  since  been 
exposed,  so  that  the  ever-watchful  eye  of  liberty 
is  always  open  to  its  dark  plottings  and  Jesuitical 
designs.  But  Episcopal  Methodism  is  a  Protest- 
ant system,  sprung  up  almost  imperceptibly  in 
our  midst,  under  circumstances  and  auspices 
which  have,  till  lately,  shielded  it  from  public 
reprobation,  and,  for  the  most  part,  even  from 
any  general  suspicion.  Here  lies  the  differ- 
ence. 

It  is  easy  to  see  ,that  a  people,  trained  under 
the  influence  of  such  a  system,  are  poorly  pre- 


160 


GROUNDS  OF  SECESSION 


pared  to  appreciate  the  benefits  of  civil  freedom, 
and  consequently  are  dangerous  hands  into  which 
to  commit  the  guardianship  of  our  free  institu- 
tions. At  least  one-tenth  part  of  the  American 
population  are  either  directly  or  indirectly  con- 
nected with  the  M.  E.  Church;  and  when  the 
consolidated  and  homogeneous  character  of  the 
organization  is  taken  into  view,  it  must  be  readily 
discovered  that  the  same  political  views  must 
generally  obtain  throughout  this  entire  body. 
The  political  power,  therefore,  of  this  numerous 
people,  subject  as  they  are  to  a  central  control,  may 
be  brought  to  bear,  in  any  given  case,  with  tre- 
mendous effect  upon  the  destiny  of  the  republic. 
A  hint  may  be  suggested  by  the  bishops  to  their 
presiding  elders,  by  the  presiding  elders  to  the 
preachers  on  thfeir  several  districts,  and  by  the 
preachers  to  their  class-leaders  in  the  several 
societies,  by  the  leaders  to  the  members  of  their 
classes ;  and  thus  a  scheme  may  be  extended, 
and  simultaneously  adopted,  from  one  end  of  the 
Union  to  the  other,  in  every  society  of  the  con- 
nection. 

It  is  not  intended  by  these  remarks  to  intimate, 
that  the  church  was  instituted  for  any  corrupt 
purpose,  or  that  the  present  generation  of  her  min- 
isters entertain  any  treasonable  designs  towards 
the  government  of  our  country ;  but  the  object  is 

show,  that  when,  under  the  influence  of  rapid- 
ly increasing  wealth  and  power,  and  the  despot- 
ism of  its  principles,  it  shall  become  corrupt,  then 


FROM  THE  M.  E.  CHURCH. 


161 


it  will  afford  a  most  ready  and  efficier-t  agency, 
by  which  a  worldly  and  ambitious  priesthood, 
joined  with  some  intriguing  and  liberty-hating 
political  party,  may  upturn  the  foundations  of  our 
government,  demolish  the  temple  of  freedom,  and 
establish  an  absolute  despotism  over  the  land. 
Such  is  the  tendency  of  this  system;  and,  if  the 
result  is  not  realized,  it  will  not  be  from  any  want 
of  adaptation  in  the  principles  which  the  system 
involves,  but  because  the  spirit  of  liberty  will  be 
too  vigilant  to  suffer  herself  to  be  slain  by  its  per- 
fidious hand. 

By  tracing  the  parallel  lines  of  civil  and  eccle- 
siastical history  up  to  antiquity,  it  will  be  found, 
that  in  proportion  as  religious  freedom  has  ob- 
tained, in  the  same  proportion  has  civil  govern- 
ment been  administered  according  to  free  princi- 
ples. Do  we  not  owe  our  own  republic  to  a 
band  of  religionists,  who  fled  to  the  wilds  of 
America  to  secure  to  themselves  and  their  pos- 
terity the  God-given  and  inviolable  rights  of  con- 
science ? 

Is  not  the  church  of  God  to  be  the  standard  of 
justice  and  right  ?  But  are  not  the  recognition  and 
administration  of  justice  and  right,  the  essentials 
of  civil  as  well  as  religious  freedom  "?  If,  then, 
the  church  exerts  her  appropriate  power  on  the 
community  in  which  she  exists,  and  does  not  at 
the  same  time  sustain  the  principles  of  freedom 
by  securing  liberty  of  conscience  to  her  own 
members,  can  we  expect  that  civil  freedom  will 
14* 


162  GROUNDS  OF  SECESSION 


long  continue  1  It  is  manifest  that  if  the  church 
exerts  the  power  it  is  its  province  to  exert,  it  will 
give  character  to  a  nation ;  in  which  case,  if  a 
despotism  exists  in  the  former,  it  will  sooner  or 
later  sway  its  iron  sceptre  over  the  latter.  If  not, 
why  is  the  spread  of  the  Romish  church  in  this 
country  considered  so  dangerous  to  its  liberties  ? 
If  it  is  no  matter  what  church  organization' we 
have,  then  let  Catholicism  multiply  itself  till  it 
swallow  up  all  sects  and  banish  Protestantism 
from  the  Mnd.  Why  not?  Is  despotism  any  more 
dangerous  in  the  Romish  tlian  in  the  Methodist 
Episcopal  or  any  other  church  1  Does  not  the  M. 
E.  church,  in  effect,  set  up  infallibility,  deny  the 
right  of  private  judgment,  and  cut  off  the  exer- 
cise of  individual  conscience  ■? 

In  alluding  to  the  rights  of  self-government,  do 
not  her  authorities  say,  "  We  know  no  such  rightu  ?" 
And  yet  it  is  this  organization,  involving  as  it  does 
principles  at  deadly  war  with  inahenable  rights, 
that  is  exerting  a  direct  control  over  a  large  pro- 
portion of  the  American  people,  and  by  an  influ- 
ence, more  remote,  but  not  less  certain,  is  wear- 
ing away  the  foundations  of  civil  fi-eedom  itself. 

The  M.  E.  church  not  only  exerts  a  dangerous 
influence  on  the  liberties  of  the  nation,  by  the  di- 
rect and  legitimate  tendency  of  its  principles,  but 
also  by  the  support  which  it  gives  to  the  system 
of  slavery  in  our  land.  This  church  has  taken  the 
ground,  either  in  her  declaration  or  acts,  that 
slavery,  as  it  exists  in  the  United  States,  is  not  a 


FROM  THE  M.   E.  CnURCII. 


163 


moral  or  political  evil ;  that  is,  that  it  is  no  evil 
at  all.  It  has  cast  the  broad  EEgis  of  Episcopal 
authority  over  the  system  as  a  shield  of  defence. 
It  has  prohibited  the  agitation  of  the  slavery  ques- 
tion, and  enforced  the  violation  of  its  edicts  with 
the  severest  of  ecclesiastical  penalties.  It  has  shap- 
ed its  policy,  on  this  question,  according  to  the 
slave  laws  of  the  South,  in  rejection  of  the  plain- 
est j^recepts  of  Jesus  Christ.  It  admits  to  its 
communion  and  ministry  hundreds  of  slavehold- 
ers who  hold  in  cruel  bondage  tens  of  thousands  of 
their  own  brethren  and  sisters  in  Christ ;  and,  to 
accommodate  slavery,  has  disfranchised  all  its 
colored  members  throughout  the  slaveholding 
States  of  the  Union. 

In  doing  all  this,  and  much  more  that  might  be 
mentioned,  the  M.  E.  church  is  giving  its  support 
to  an  institution  which,  more  than  all  others,  is 
calculated  to  sap  the  foundations  of  our  civil 
freedom,  and  hasten  the  republic  into  the  grave 
where  lie  the  mouldering  kingdoms  of  antiquity. 

In  looking  in  upon  the  state  of  things  in  the  M. 
E.  church,  it  does  not  require  a  very  sagacious 
observer  to  see,  in  their  incipient  beginnings,  the 
very  corruptions  of  the  Romish  church.  And  as 
sure  as  the  Bishop  of  Rome  was  ever  vested  with 
the  name  and  power  of  a  Pope,  and  as  certain  as 
John  Tetzel,  in  the  name  of  Leo  X.  bartered  in- 
dulgences to  sin,  so  sure  the  E.  Methodist  church, 
unless  it  change  its  policy,  or  is  controlled  by 
some  foreign  influences,  will  degenerate  into  a 


164 


GROUDNS  OF  SECESSION 


Popedom,  iu  wliich  a  cringing  and  degraded  laity 
wilLbe  but  tlie  passive  tools  of  a  despotic  priest- 
hood. 

The  Romish  church  at  the  close  of  the  third 
century,  was  not  so  suliject  to  the  dominance 
of  the  clergy,  nor  so  liable  to  a  reign  of  spiritual 
despotism,  as  is  the  Mctliodist  Episcopal  Church  at 
this  present  moment. 

The  corruptions  and  usurpations  in  the  primi- 
tix^e  church  sprang  up  incidentally,  and  were  nour- 
ished by  circumstances,  but  the  M.  E.  church,  as  has 
been  seen,  has  its  origin  in  usurpation,  and  involves 
in  its  organization  the  very  elements  of  ABSOLUTE 
POWER. 


FROM  THE  M.   E.  CHURCH. 


165 


PRESENT  POSITION 
OF  THEM.  E.  CHURCH. 

THE  COLORED  TESTIMONY  RESOLUTION. 

1.  The  Rev.  Silas  Comfort,  at  the  time  a  mem- 
ber of  the  Missouri  Conference,  permitted  a  col- 

'  ored  person  to  testify*  against  a  white  person, 
in  a  church  trial. 

2.  For  this  conduct  he  was  tried  at  the  next 
session  of  the  Conference,  and  convicted  of  mal- 
administration. 

3.  He  appealed  to  the  next  General  Conference, 
and  the  conference  refused  to  hear  the  appeal, 
thereby  denying  the  right  of  appeal  from  such  a 
decision. 

4.  Upon  the  top  of  this  refusal  to  hear  the  ap- 
peal, the  General  Conference  passed  the  colored 
testimony  resolution,  by  which  they  declared 
that  the  admission  of  such  testimony,  "  is  inex- 
pedient and  unjustifiable."'  For  this,  it  cannot  be 
denied,  the  northern  division  of  the  church  is  re- 
sponsible, for  they  had  a  majority  in  the  Confer- 
ence, and  their  leading  men  voted  for  the  meas- 
ure. Here  the  matter  rested  for  four  years,  when 
the  General  Conference  of  1844  repealed  it. 

THE  REPE.iL. 

1.  The  repeal  caiuiot  place  the  church  m  a  more 
favorable  point  of  light  than  she  was  before  the 


166  GROUNDS  OF  SECESSION 


passage  of  the  resolution.  As  well  might  a  man 
or  a'  community  claim  to  be  better  for  having 
done  wrong.  Granting  all  that  can  be  asked, 
that  the  repeal  placed  the  church  just  where  it 
was  before  its  passage,  and  it  will  be  seen  that  it 
does  not  reach  the  case.  It  leaves  them  where 
they  were,  which  is  this ;  an  annual  conference 
had  condemned  a  member  for  admittuig  colored 
testimony,  and  the  General  Conference  refused  to 
hear  his  appeal. 

2.  The  repeal  does  not  legally  secure  to  colored 
members  the  right  to  be  heard  in  church  trials. 
It  certainly  could  restore  only  what  it  took  away, 
and  it  did  not  take  away  the  right  of  colored  mem- 
bers to  testify,  for  they  had  not  the  right  to  be  tak- 
en away.  This  is  proved  by  the  fact  that  an  an- 
nual Conference  declared  it  to  be  maladministra- 
tion to  admit  a  colored  person  to  testify,  and  the 
General  Conference  had  refused  to  allow  his  ap- 
peal. 

3.  The  decisions  of  the  General  Conference  in 
the  case  of  Mr.  Comfort,  fully  settles  the  legal 
question,  that  it  is  mal-administration  to  admit 
colored  testimony,  and  of  course  its  admission 
must  be  unlawful.  This  decision  was  in  no  sense 
touched  by  the  repeal  of  the  colored  testimony 
resolution,  but  remains  in  full  force  to  this  day. 
Thus  it  is  clear  that  nothing  but  a  little  show  has 
been  gained  by  the  repeal.  The  colored  mem- 
ber has  no  more  right  to  testify  than  before. 

To  conclude,  if  the  repeal  of  the  colored  testi- 


FROM  THE  M.  E.  CHURCH. 


167 


mony  resolution  was  an  anti-slavery  victory  in 
1844,  its  passage  could  have  been  no  less  a  pro- 
slavery  victory  in  1840.  This  is  not  a  very  glo- 
rious position,  when  it  is  kno\ra  that  such  men  as 
Dr.  Peck  of  the  jM.  E.  Book  Room,  helped  to 
achieve  the  pro-slavery  victory  in  1840.  If  those 
who  voted  for  the  repeal  in  1844,  proved  them- 
selves anti-slavery  thereby,  it  follows  that  Dr. 
Peck  proved  himself  no  less  pro-slavery  by  voting 
for  the  resolution  in  1840. 

ANTI-SLAVERY  PETITIONS. 

Nine  Annual  Conferences  and  ten  thousand 
members  petitioned  the  General  Conference  of  1844 
to  take  action  against  slavery.  Many  of  these 
petitions  prayed  for  an  entire  separation  of  slavery 
from  the  church.  The  following  resolution  was 
adopted  by  a  Methodist  Convention  in  Boston, 
Mass.,  Jan.  18,  1843.  It  shows  the  wishes  of  the 
petitioners. 

^'■Resolved,  That  slavery  being  a  sin,  and  this 
sin  in  the  M.  E.  Church,  and  the  church  a  unit, 
nothing  short  of  a  SPEEDY  and  ENTIRE  separa- 
tion of  slavery  from  the  church  can  satisfy  the 
consciences  of  honest  and  faithful  abolitionists." 

After  waiting  a  year,  these  brethren  petitioned 
the  General  Conference,  and  their  petitions  were 
denied.  A  Committee  on  these  petitions  reported 
against  granting  the  prayer,  and  the  report  was 
adopted  without  a  word  of  debate.  Are  the  au- 
thors of  the  above  resolntion  satisfied  ?   Are  their 


lOS 


GROUNDS  OF  SECESSION 


conspieucos  at  ease  ?  Have  they  ceased  to  be 
'honest  and  faithful  abolitionists'?"  There  has 
been  no  "  speedy  and  entire  separation  of  slavery 
from  the  churdr,"  nor  is  there  likely  to  be. 

DIVISION  OF  THE  CHVRCU. 

The  M.  E.  Church  is  divided,  it  is  true ;  but 
this  is  no  proof  of  anti-slavery  on  the  part  of  the 
north. 

1.  The  division  was  a  southern  measure.  The 
north  did  not  propbse  it,  did  not  desire  it,  did  all 
they  could  to  prevent  it.  But  why  did  the  south 
leave,  if  the  north  were  not  anti-slavery  ■?  The 
reason  is  plain,  the  north,  to  prevent  her  members 
"  going  over  iu  troops  to  the  secedcrs,"  took  posi- 
tions which  offended  the  south.  Though  shivery 
was  not  injured,  it  was  offended  at  the  half  way 
expediency  course  of  the  north.  To  speak  in  the 
use  of  legal  terms,  there  was  an  assault  on  slavery, 
Uut  no  battery.    Words !  words  ! 

2.  The  terms  of  the  division  are  essentially 
pro-slavery ;  and  these  were  dictated  by  the  north . 
riiey  fully  recognize  the  slaveholding  Christianity 
of  the  south.  The  preachers  are  allowed  to  make 
the  election  between  the  two  divisions  without 
censure.  The  north  has  pledged  itself  not  to  col- 
lect churches  in  the  southern  division.  This  ac- 
knowledges the  southern  division  as  a  branch  of 
the  Christian  church.  Is  the  north  anti-slavery, 
when  it  has  handed  over  one  half  of  the  nation 


FROM  THE  M.   E.  CHURCH. 


169 


',0  a  slaveholding  church  for  the  safe  keeping  of 
then"  souls  ? 

3.  The  plan  of  separation  is  highly  oppressive 
upon  minorities.  Suppose  portions  of  societies 
south  of  the  line  of  division  to  be  so  opposed  to 
slavery  that  they  cannot  walk  with  the  southern 
church ;  they  are  abandoned  by  the  north.  The 
north  has  pledged  itself  that  it  will  not  take  any 
pastoral  charge  of  such  portions  of  the  church. 


170 


GROUNDS  OF  SECESSION 


CONCLUDING  PORTION  OF  AN  ABLE 

REVIEW, 

OF  THE  PRESENT  POSITION  OF  THE  M.  E.  CHURCH 
WITH  REGARD  TO  SLAVERY. 

BY  KEV.   EDWARD  SMITH. 

After  the  question  of  Radicalism  was  settled 
in  1832,  the  question  of  slavery  began  again  to 
agitate  the  church  violently  in  the  north,  and 
action  was  attempted  to  be  taken  against  it  by 
annual  and  quarterly  conferences ;  but  the  bish- 
ops came  forward  in  its  behalf,  and  refused  to  put 
motions  in  the  annual  conferences  condemnatory 
of  it,  and  the  presiding  elders  did  the  same  in  the 
quarterly  conferences,  with  a  few  exceptions.  So 
that  no  (or  next  to  no)  official  action  could  be 
obtained  against  it,  even  by  way  of  testimony 
and  remonstrance.  This  led  to  the  formation  of 
Methodist  Episcopal  Anti-Slavery  Societies,  to 
bring  the  subject  before  the  membership,  that 
they  might  have  correct  information  on  it.  But 
these  societies  were  not  able  to  withstand  the 
tide  of  opposition,  and  were,  after  a  short  and 
feeble  existence,  disbanded.  Anti-slavery  trav- 
elling preachers,  who  were  active  in  the  cause, 
were  tried,  some  degraded,  others  gagged,  and  a 
number  frightened  back  to  their  former  positions. 


FROM  THE  M.  E.   CHURCH.  171 


The  excitement  in  the  church  was  crushed,  and 
the  subject  to  all  appearance  pat  to  rest  for  more 
than  a  year,  when  a  few  anti-slavery  preachers? 
having  lost  all  hope  of  a  reformation  in  the  church, 
withdrew  from  it  in  the  year  1842.  They  were 
soon  followed  by  others,  and  steps  were  taken  to 
organize  a  Methodist  Church,  free  from  any  con- 
nection with  slavery,  which  organization  was 
completed  in  June,  1842.  This  little  movement 
khidled  a  mighty  anti-slavery  flame,  where  the 
subject  had  been  to  appearance  dead  for  nearly 
two  years;  three  very  large  conventions  were 
held  in  a  short  time  after  the  first  withdrawals,  and 
high  ground  taken  against  the  sin  of  slaveiy. 
Assurances  were  given  by  these  conventions  that 
the  general  conference  of  1844  would  do  some 
great  thing  against  slavery,  and  the  anti-slavery 
members  were  exhorted  not  to  leave  the  church, 
but  to  wait  and  see  what  the  general  conference 
would  do.  And  many  of  them  did  wait  to  see 
the  result. 

Previous  to  this  time,  some  southern  papers 
intimated  that  the  South  would  insist  on  having  a 
slaveholder  elected  bishop.  The  new-born  anti- 
slavery  zeal  which  the  secession  of  "  Scott  &  Co." 
had  brought  into  the  world,  declaimed  against 
this,  urging  the  members  to  petition  the  General 
Conference  against  it,  and  also  for  some  decided 
action  "to  free  the  church  from  all  connection 
with  slavery,"  declaring  that  if  the  church  was 


172 


GROUNDS  OF  SECESSION 


not  SO  freed,  "  it  could  not  be  a  home  for  anti- 
slavery  Methodists." 

It  was  considered  an  easy  matter  to  redeem  the 
pledge,  not  to  elect  a  slaveholder  bishop.  As  the 
conference  had  a  right  to  -vote  for  a  non-slave 
holder,  the  North,  having  a  majority  of  votes, 
could  cast  their  vote  for  a  candidate  of  this  kind, 
thus  redeem  the  pledge  given  to  the  members, 
and  on  their  return  claim  that  they  had  preserved 
the  high  and  holy  ofhce  from  the  "  foul  blot  of 
slavery."  This  much  gained,  would  form  a 
reason  to  hope  that  the  rest  might  be,  by  the  next 
conference,  and  the  people  be  thus  induced  to 
remain  in  the  church.  But  when  they  came  to 
the  conference,  they  found  the  "  foul  blot"  already 
on  the  high  and  holy  office,  one  of  the  bishops 
being  a  slaveholder  ;  and  how  to  get  it  off»meet 
the  expectations  they  had  raised,  and  keep  the 
people  in  the  church,  was  the  difficulty. 

The  first  plan  proposed  was  to  ask  Bishop  An- 
drew to  resign  his  office  ;  but  this  was  abandoned, 
and  the  conference  did  no  more  than  express  their 
sense  of  what  it  was  proper  for  him  to  do,  viz.  : 
"  that  he  would  desist  from  the  exercise  of  his 
office  so  long  as  he  might  remain  connected  with 
slavery."  Journals  of  1844,  p.  84.  This  decision 
was  come  to  after  about  twelve  days'  discussion 
No  one  offered  to  table  charges  against  Bishop  A. 
for  a  violation  of  his  Discipline,  or  pretended  that 
any  rule  of  the  church  had  been  violated  by  him : 


FROM  THE  M.   E.   CHURCH.  173 

und  when  the  conference  adopted  the  resolution 
expressive  of  their  sense  of  what  would  be  pro- 
per for  Bishop  A.  to  do,  they  seemed  not  to  know 
what  ihey  had  done.  The  thing  was  "of  doubt- 
ful disputation."  And  this  has  been  the  case 
with  that  church's  action  on  slavery  from  the  be- 
ginning. There  has  been  so  much  doing  and 
undoing,  that  it  is  extremely  difficult  to  balance 
the  account,  or  know  what  is  done,  or  rather  is 
not  undone — what  remains  done.  The»  South 
believed  that  the  conference  had  virtually  sus- 
pended the  Bishop  without  the  form  of  a  trial 
and  protested  against  the  act  as  extra-judicial. 
The  North  appointed  a  committee  to  answer  the 
protest,  which  answer  was  placed  on  the  journals 
of  the  conference  as  the  answer  of  the  majority, 
by  a  vote  of  116  to  26.  This  document  took  the 
ground  that  Bishop  A.  was  not  suspended,  noi- 
even  tried ;  that  "  he  is  still  a  bishop,  and  that 
should  he  act,  his  acts  would  be  valid."  Jour- 
nals.— p.  203.  The  other  bishops  did  not  appear 
to  know  what  the  conference  had  done  with  their 
colleague,  and  addressed  a  note  to  the  conference, 
to  know  what  should  be  done  with  Bishop  A.'s 
name ;  what  about  his  salary  ;  what  work  should 
he  do,  or  should  he  do  any ;  and  if  any,  how 
should  he  be  appointed  to  it  1  This  was  previous 
to  the  vote  on  the  answer  to  the  protest.  The 
conference,  by  a  vote  of  155  to  17,  directed  his 
name  to  stand  on  the  minutes,  in  answer  to  the 
question,  '-Who  are  the  bishops  of  the  M.  E. 
15* 


174 


GROUNDS  OF  SECESSION 


Church?"  With  the  names  of  the  other  bishops, 
and  also  ui  the  hymn-book  and  Discipline,  as  it 
had  done  previously ;  and  by  a  vote  of  152  to  14, 
directed  that  his  salary  should  be  paid  as  the 
salary  of  the  other  bishops  were  paid.  In  these 
two  respects,  be  differed  nothing  from  his  col- 
leagues, and  by  a  vote  of  103  to  G7,  he  was  left  to 
determine,  by  his  "  own  decision  and  action," 
what  work  he  would  do,  in  view  of  the  expressed 
sense  of  the  conference.  From  all  which  we  see 
that  Bishop  A.  was  not  tried,  not  deposed  or  sus- 
pended, even  virtually,  nor  even  advised  not  to 
exercise  his  episcopal  functions.  He  was  left  at 
liberty  to  decide  whether  he  would  or  would  not 
exercise  them,  and  to  what  extent.  The  confer- 
ence expressed  their  sense — did  not  give  their 
advise.  They  gave  the  reason  for  their  sense. 
The  abolitionists  of  the  North  were  ready  to  leave 
the  church  on  account  of  her  connection  with 
slavery;  and  if  a  slaveholding  bishop  should 
visit  the  northern  conferences,  hundreds,  yea, 
"  thousands  would  leave  the  church  ;"  and  they 
thought  Bishop  A.  ought  to  prevent  this  by  not 
acting.  Though  it  was  jjerfectly  lawful  for  him 
to  act,  it  was  not  expedient  in  these  circumstan- 
ces. Yet  they  would  not  determine  the  point — 
they  left  this  for  him. — Journal,  p.  118. 

The  action  of  the  conference  in  the  case  of 
Bishop  Andrew  was  the  cause  of  the  division  of 
the  church  by  the  Louisville  Convention.  There 
was  some  complaint  of  the  action  in  the  case  of 


FROM  THE  M.  E.  CHURCH. 


175 


Mr.  Harding,  of  the  Baltimore  Conference,  but  the 
southern  delegates  did  not  protest  against  it,  ot 
make  it  a  ground  of  separation.  See  Protest, 
Jour.  p.  186. 

Now  I  inquire  what  were  the  matter's  at  issue 
between  the  North  and  the  South,  which  led  to 
the  separation  of  the  largest  religious  society  in 
the  country  1  The  North  did  not  pretend  to  say 
that  slaveholding  was  sinful,  or  in  any  way  im- 
moral, in  Bishop  A's  case.  This  was  not  said  by 
a  single  member  of  the  Conference,  in  a  debate 
of  twelve  days.  They  did  not  say  that  slavery 
was  a  malum  per  se — an  evil  in  itself.  This  was 
not  said  by  the  body,  nor  by  a  single  member  of 
it.  No  new  action  was  taken  against  slavery — 
no  new  ground  proposed  to  be  taken.  Ministers 
were  left  to  act  as  they  had  acted  from  1800,  and 
members  as  they  had  acted  from  1808,  in  the 
matter  of  buying  and  selling  slaves,  and  from 
1785  in  the  matter  of  holding  them.  In  answer 
to  about  ten  thousand  petitioners,  praying  the 
conference  to  take  some  action  to  '•  free  the 
church  entirely  from  any  connection  with  slave- 
ry," the  conference  replied  that  "  it  was  inexpedi- 
ent to  take  any  action  on  that  point."  The  South 
asked  no  change  in  the  Discipline  to  favor  slavery, 
not  even  in  the  person  of  a  single  individual. 
The  South  were  perfectly  satisfied  with  the  Disci- 
pline "  as  it  is."  The  North  gave  not  the  least 
,  intimation  of  a  wish  to  have  it  changed.  What, 
then,  was  the  difficulty  ?   Plainly  this.  The  South 


176  GROUNDS  OF  SECESSIOW 

claimed  forherslaveholcling  ministers,  in  the  per- 
son of  Bishop  Andrew,  the  rights  secured  to  them 
in  the  Discipline.  The  North  denied  them  the 
enjoyment  of  those  rights,  purely  on  the  ground 
of  expediency.  They  claimed  that  if  a  slave- 
holding  bishop  should  come  to  hold  their  northern 
conferences,  their  abolition  members  would  leave 
the  church  by  thousands .  This  would  be  a  sore 
calamity.  Expediency  required  its  prevention ; 
and  if  a  slaveholder  was  bishop,  he  would  have  to 
travel  at  large,  wonld  have  to  come  to  the  North 
and  thus  drive  the  abolitionists  out  of  the  church. 
Hence  Bishop  A.  ought  not  to  exercise  the  func- 
tions of  his  office,  while  their  exercise  would 
produce  this  effect — while  the  impediment  re- 
mained. Both  agreed  that  he  had  a  right  to  be 
bishop — that  he  could  rightfully  exercise  the 
episcopal  functions ;  but  one  contended  that  it 
was  inexpedient  to  do  so,  the  other  that  it  was 
expedient  to  do  right,  and  that  the  North  was 
bound  to  allow  their  Southern  brethren  not  only 
the  right  to  be  slaveholders,  but  that  slavery 
should  not  bfe  considered  as  disqualifying  them 
in  any  sense  for  the  episcopal  office.  This  was 
the  true  issue.  It  involves  nothing  but  a  matter 
of  mere  expediency ;  not  a  particle  of  principle 
is  involved  in  the  whole  atlair. 

After  seeing  what  led  to  the  separation,  we  see 
at  once  how  far  they  are  apart. — The  North  takes 
the  discipline  "  as  it  is,"  proposing  no  change  on 
the  subject  of  slavery.    The  South  adopted  it  in 


FROM  THE  M.  E.  CHURCHl  177" 


the  verj'  same  way  at  the  Louisville  Convention. 
Neither  intimated  a  wish  for  anything  not  in 
the  discipline,  nor  expres  sed  dissatisfaction  with 
anything  therein  contained.  The  North  will  not 
agree  that  a  slaveholder  shall  enjoy  his  disci- 
phnary  right  in  the  office  of  a  bishop,  but  he 
may  in  every  other  office  or  station  in  the  church. 
The  South  claim  for  the  slaveholder  the  exercise 
of  his  disciplinary  rights  hi  every  station.  The 
North  do  not  make  the  refusal  of  right  a  matter  of 
principle,  but  of  expediency.  All  the  North  asks 
is  not  to  have  a  slaveholder  in  the  episcopacy ; 
not  because  the  discipline  forbids  it,  but  because  it 
is  inexpedient.  This  is  what  the  North  asks  ;  this 
is  what  the  South  refuses.  On  this  single  pointthey 
are  apart — on  eveiything  else  together.  This  is 
the  true  state  of  the  ease,  and  we  may  truly  exclaim, 
"Behold  how  great  a  matter  a  little  fire  kindleth." 

The  General  Conference  of  1840  decided  that 
slaveholders  had  a  disciplinary  right  to  the  office 
of  bishop,  in  passing  the  following  resolution : — 

"  Resolved,  by  the  delegates  of  the  several 
annual  conferences,  in  General  Conference  as- 
sembled. That  under  the  provisional  exception  of 
the  general  rule  of  the  church,  on  the  subject  of 
slavery,  the  simple  holding  of  slaves,  or  mere 
ownership  of  slave  property  in  states  or  territories 
where  the  laws  do  not  admit  of  emancipation, 
and  the  liberated  slave  to  enjoy  his  freedom,  con- 
stitutes no  legal  barrier  to  the  election  or  ordi- 
uation  of  ministers  to  the  various  grades  of  office 


GROUNDS  OF  SECESSION 


now  in  the  ministry  of  the  M.  E.  Church;  and  can- 
not, therefore,  be  considered  as  operating  any  for- 
feiture of  right  in  view  of  such  election  and  ordi- 
nation." [See  Journals  of  1840,  p.  171.] 

This  resolution  gives  the  sense  of  the  General 
Conference  of  1840,  which  resolution  was  not 
asked  to  be  rescinded  at  the  conference  of  1844  ; 
by  which  it  appears  that,  the  General  Conference 
being  judge,  slaveholders  may  be  rightfully  elect- 
ed and  ordained  to  any  grade  of  office  in  the  M. 
£.  Church,  in  those  states  wliich  forbid  emanci- 
pation, or  deny  the  liberated  slave  to^enjoy  his 
freedom. 

I  come  next  to  consider  the  connection  of  the 
northern  portion  of  the  church  with  slavery. 
After  the  southern  protest  was  presented,  contain- 
ing a  declaration  that  the  South  could  not  submit 
longer  to  the  violation  of  their  rights,  a  committee 
of  nine  was  appointed  to  report  a  plan  of  separa- 
tion.— This  commit  tee  reported  twelve  resolutions, 
which  were  adopted.  The  first  bears  on  the 
point  in  hand,  and  reads  as  follows  : — "  That 
should  the  annual  conferences  in  the  slavehold- 
ing  states,  find  it  necessary  to  unite  in  a  distinct 
ecclesiastical  connection,  the  following  rule  shall 
be  observed  with  regard  to  the  northern  boundary 
of  such  connection :  All  the  societies,  stations, 
and  conferences  adhering  to  the  church  in  the 
South,  by  a  vote  of  the  majority  of  the  members 
of  said  societies,  stations,  and  conferences,  shall 
remain  under  the  uiunolested  pastoral  care  of  the 


FROM  THE  M.   E.  CIIORCH. 


179 


southern  church  :  and  the  ministers  of  the  Metho- 
dist Episcopal  Church  shall  in  no  wise  attempt 
to  organize  churches  or  societies  within  the  limits 
of  the  church  south ;  nor  shall  they  attempt  to  ex- 
ercise any  pastoral  oversight  therein.  It  being 
understood  that  the  ministry  of  the  South  recipro- 
cally observe  the  same  rule  in  relation  to  stations, 
societies,  and  conferences,  adhering,  by  a  vote  of 
a  majority,  to  the  Methodist  Episcopal  Church; 
provided  also,  that  this  rule  shall  apply  only  to 
societies,  stations,  and  conferences  bordering  on 
the  line  of  division,  and  not  to  interior  charges, 
which  shall  in  all  cases  be  left  to  the  care  of  that 
church  within  whose  territory  they  are  situated." 
[Journals  of  1844,  p.  135.] 

The  first  thing  worthy  of  notice  in  this  resolu- 
tion, is  the  fact  that  the  conferences  iu  the 
slaveholding  states  were  made  the  judges  of 
the  necessity  for  division;  and  from  their  de- 
cision there  is  no  appeal.  They  were  authorized, 
by  a  vote  of  147  to  22,  to  decide  this  question, 
and  to  organize  a  separate  coimection.  They 
have  decided  in  favor  of  division,  and  have 
organized  a  separate  connection.  The  delegates 
appointed  the  time  for  the  organizing  conven- 
tion, should  the  annual  conferences  find  it  ne- 
cessary to  hold  such  a  convention.  This  was 
not  determining  the  question,  but  submitting 
it  to  the  annual  conferences  for  their  decision ; 
and  every  conference  in  the  slave  states  deter- 
mined in  favor  of  the  convention,  and  sent  dele- 


180 


GROUNDS  OP  SECESSfON 


gates  to  it.  These  delegates  decided,  with  but 
three  dissenting  voices,  to  form  a  separate  con- 
nection. The  South  has  done  what  the  General 
Conference  authorized  them  to  do,  and  in  the  very 
way  prescribed.  The  South  has  not  acted  schism- 
atically,  but  by  the  authority  and  direction  of  the 
General  Conference. 

Second. — The  societies,  sections  and  conferences 
bordering  on  the  line  of  division,  have  the  right 
to  determine,  by  a  vote,  whether  they  will  belong 
to  the  North  or  the  South.  The  conferences  au- 
thorized to  form  the  southern  church,  were  the 
conferences  in  the  slaveholding  states,  and  none 
else.  There  are  four  conferences,  part  in  slave 
states  and  part  in  free  states,  Philadelphia,  Balti- 
more, Pittsburgh  and  Ohio.  These  four  include 
the  states  of  Delaware,  Maryland,  and  two-thirds 
of  Virginia.  All  these  remain  in  the  North.  The 
Virginia,  Holston,  Kentucky,  and  Missouri  con- 
ferences border  on  the  south  side  of  the  line,  and 
have  a  right  to  come  to  the  north,  and  thus  extend 
the  southern  line  of  the  northern  church,  so  as  to 
embrace  live  slave  states  and  part  of  a  sixth ; 
this  can  be  done.  The  societies  and  stations  on 
either  side  of  the  line  can  choose  which  division 
they  will  belong  to ;  and  after  all  these  choices 
are  made,  the  northern  church  will  include  two 
whole  slave  states,  and  two-thirds  of  a  third  ;  and 
it  may  include  much  more.  The  slave  territory 
which  will  be  certainly  included  in  the  northern 
churph,  contaius  at  least,  according  to  the  minute* 


FROM  THE  M.  E.  CHURCH.  181 

of  1843-1844,  twenty-seven  thousand  slave  mem- 
bers of  the  church ;  one-sixth  of  all  the  slaves  in 
the  whole  church,  and  about  the  same  proportion 
of  slaveholders.  •  There  are  about  twenty-five 
thousand  slaveholders  in  the  whole  church  ;  and  if 
there  are  as  many  slaveholders,  in  proportion  to 
the  slave  population  in  the  slave*"  territory,  in- 
chided  in  the  northern  church  as  in  the  southern, 
there  are  four  thousand  in  the  northern  church  ; 
but  if  but  half  as  many,  then  the  northern  church 
contains  two  thousand  ;  and  there  are  unquestion- 
ably half  as  many ;  so  that  the  north  is,  and  will 
continue  to  be,  just  as  much  coimected  with  sla- 
very as  she  was  before  the  separation. 

-The  only  difference  is,  there  are  not  so  many 
slaveholders'  in  the  northern  M.  E.  church,  but 
the  fellowship  of  slaveholders  is  as  actual  and  as 
sinfnl.  If  ever  the  .connection  of  the  M.  E. 
church  was  sinful,  it  is  so  yet.  The  north  did  not 
ask  for  the  division  ;  did  not  want  it — hoped  to 
the  last  it  would  not  take  place.  [See  Journals 
of  1844,  page  210.]  The  northern  papers  have 
deprecated  it — insisted  that  there  was  no' cause 
for  it.  The  north  asked  not  to  be  freed  from 
church  connection  with  slavery — from  the  fellow- 
ship of  slaveholders — hoped  to  the  last  they 
might  not  be  thus  freed—did  all  they  could  to 
continue  slaveholders  in  their  brotherly  embrace, 
except  to  agree  that  a  slaveholdiug  bishop  should 
come  to  the  north  and  drive  the  abolitionists  out 
of  the  church.   But  the  south  could  not  agree  to 


1^  GSOUNDS  OF  SECESSIOK 

be  hugged  in  the  same  bosom  with  abolitionists, 
and  to  free  themselves  from  comiection  Avith 
those  who  believed  slavery  sinful,  and  must  there- 
fore continue  to  agitate  the  subject,  or  become 
wicked,  by  making  peace  with  sin,  asked  and 
obtained  !j  separate  church. '  And  as  theirobjcct 
was  to  be  freed  from  the  agitation  of  abolition, 
they  had  the  line  run  to  secure  that  object,  throw- 
ing a  large  break-water  of  slave  territory  in  the 
northern  church,  to  keep  the  floods  of  abolition 
from  coming  down  on  them. 

Both  churches  are  cormected  with  slavery  in 
the  very  same  way,  by  the  provision  of  the  very 
same  discipline.  Slaveholding  members  and  local 
preachers  have  the  same  security  in  both ;  but 
travelling  preachers  and  bishops  may  not  be  al- 
lowed, on  the  ground  of  expediency,  to  be  con- 
nected with  it  to  the  same  extent  in  the  northern 
church,  they  may  in  the  southern  one :  this  is  all 
the  difference.  Both  are  slaveholding  churches. 
The  northern  church  contains  both  slaveholders 
and  abolitionists,  the  southern  are  free  from  ab- 
olitionists. :  This  is  the  true  state  of  the  case. 

,  Tliird. — This  resolution  provides  that  when  the 
line  shall  finally  be  determined,  the  preachers  oi 
the  northern  church  shall  "  in  no  wise  attempt  to 
organize  churches"  or  "exercise  any  pastoral 
oversight"  within'  the  bounds  of  the  southern 
church. .  This  provision  gives  the  slaves  up  for- 
ever to  the  ministry  of  the  slaveholders,  and  a 
slaveholding  church,  binds  thousands  of  minis- 


FROM  THE   M.   E.   CHURCH.  183 


ters  not  to  obey  the  Saviour,  in  goiug  into  all  the 
world  to  preach  his  gospel.  The  aibolitionists  of 
the  north  do  well  to  prate  about  their  anti-slavery, 
their  love  for  the  slave,  after  binding  themselves 
by  a  covenant  never  to  preach  to  them  glad 
tidings  the  opening  of  the  prison  doors,  and  the 
acceptable  year  of  the  Lord,  though  Providence 
should  op«n  the  way  so  to  do.  It  is  most  likely 
tliat  the  General  Conference  of  1848,  will  disan- 
nul this  restriction :  at  least,  there  are  such  inti- 
mations. This  provisioii  is  one  of  the  most  re- 
markable acts  on  record,  and  will  burn  the  brands 
of  infamy  deeper  and  deeper  into  the  characters 
of  those  Avho  passed  it,  while  their  memories 
live.  And.  strange  to  tell,  there  were  147  votes 
for  this  covenant  to  disobey  Christ,  and  only  22 
against  it.  Not  a  single  voice  wns  against  it  from 
the  New  England  or  New  Hampshire  conferences ; 
and  but  19  in  all  from  the  free  States,  three  of  the 
22  being  from  the  Baltimore  conference.  I  esteem 
this  act  more  dishonoring  to  God,  if  possible,  than 
a  conne-tion  with  slavery ;  but  the  northern 
church  i.'^  in  for  both,  and  on  decidedly  more  un- 
christian grounds  than  she  was  ever  before  the 
division. 

The  second  resolution  provides  "  that  ministers, ' 
local  and  travelling  of  every  grade  and  office,  may 
remain  in  the  northern  church,  or,  without  blame 
attach  themselves  to  the  church  south.  This  ac- 
knowledges the  southern  church  as  equally  Chris- 
tian with  that  of  the  north  :  for  were  it  not  so, 


]jB4  GROUNDS  OP  SECESSION 


ministers  would  be  blameable  for  going  from  a 
better  to  a  worse.  This  passed  by  a  vote  of  139 
to  17. 

The  third  resolution  recommends,  for  the  con- 
currence of  the  Annual  Conferences,  an  altera- 
tion of  the  sixth  ■  restrictive  rule,  so  as  to  enable 
the  church  south,  to  get  an  equal  proportion  of 
the  Book  Concern  and  chartered  fund.  This 
passed  by  a  vote  of  147  to  12. 

The  ninth  resolution  relinquishes  all  claim  of 
the  M.  E.  church  to  the  meeting-houses,  parson- 
ages, seminaries,  colleges,  school  and  conference 
funds,  in  the  bounds  of  the  southern  church. 

From  these  several  actions  it  appears  that  the 
General  Conference  fully  agreed  for  the  south  to 
separate  and  form  a  distinct  church ;  and  that  if 
the  south  should  go  -off,  they  should  go  full-hand- 
ed. All  the  church  property  in  the  south  was 
given  up  in  favor  of  a  southern  organization; 
and  by  a  vote  of  117  to  12  it  was  agreed  that  they 
should  have  their  full  share  of  the  book  concern 
and  chartered  fimd,  if  the  Annual  Conferences  con- 
sent. I  have  been  particular  in  the  examination 
of  this  point,  to  prove,  beyond  a  doubt,  that  the 
north  fully  consented  to  let  the  south  form  a  new 
church  ;  that  the  Louisville  convention  was  fully 
authorized  by  the  General  Conference  of  1844  to 
do  what  it  did  do  ;  that  it  was,  in  no  proper  sense 
of  the  term,  either  disorderly  or  schismatical, 
that  the  division  was  by  mutual  consent;  and 
that  the  church  south,  can  rightfully  claim  all  the 


FROM  THE  M.  E.  CHURCH.  185 


guarantees  given  them  in  the  t\velve  resolutions, 
which  provided  prospectively  for  said  organiza- 
tion. The  convention  kept  "  strictly  within  the 
records." 

The  required  majorities  of  the  several  Annual 
Conferences,  did  not  concur  in  the  recommenda- 
tion to  alter  the  restrictive  rule,  to  let  the  southern 
church  have  their  proportion  of  the  Book  Concern 
and  chartered  fund  :  but  they  may  do  it  yet ; 
some  think  they  will,  but  I  have  no  expectation 
that  it  will  be  done.  As  the  matter  now  stands, 
these  concerns  with  their  vast  wealth  belong  ex- 
clusively to  the  northern  church.  Some  of  the 
northern  conferences  refused,  because  of  the  pro- 
vision binding  the  ministers  in  the  north  never  to 
"  attempt"  to  form  societies  in  the  bounds  of  the 
church  south,  or  exercise  any  pastoral  duties 
there.  But  this  poijit  was  not  sent  down  to  the 
Annual  Conferences  for  their  action,  but  was 
settled  by  the  General  Conference,  and  therefore 
formed  no  reason  for  their  action,  unless  it  was  to 
prevent  this  monstrous  thing  by  defeating  the 
.southern  organization,  as  the  south  might  not 
leave  unless  they  could  get  their  share  of  these 
concerns.  But  they  have  left  without  their  divi- 
dend; and  this  odious  provision  stands  in  full 
force,  and  the  northern  church  is  bound  to  ab.ide 
by  it — bound  by  a  vote  of  147  to  12. 

The  last  thing  claiming  attention  is  the  influence 
of  the  separation  on  the  subject  of  slavery.  It  has 
been  confidently  asserted  by  a  number  of  Epis- 
16* 


)86 


GROUNDS  OF  SECESSION 


copal  Methodist  preachers,  that  the  northern 
church  is  now  free  from  any  connection  with 
slavery.  Indeed,  from  what  I  have  been  able  to 
learn,  they  generally  make  this  declaration .  But  the 
facts  previously  noticed,  prove  that  these  preach- 
ers are  either  very  ignorant  or  very  dishonest,  for 
they  afhrm  what  is  most  palpably  untrue.  Many 
think  that  the  northern  church,  being  now  sepa- 
rated from  that  portion  of  the  south  which  is  most 
zealous  in  the  defence  of  slavery,  and  in  connec- 
tion with  the  portion  which  admits  it  to  be  an 
evil,  wrong  in  some  sense,  will  from  the  nature 
of  their  position,  become  more  and  more  anti- 
slavery,  until  she  become  fully  abolitionised ; 
and  then  slavery  Avill  be  removed  from  her  pale. 
This  theory  looks  plausible  at  first  sight,  and  no 
one  would  rejoice  more  than  the  writer  should 
this  be  the  case.  But  he  cannot  shut  his  eyes  to 
the  evidence,  which  shows  plainly  that  the  very 
opposite  will  be  the  effect ;  that  the  tone  of  anti- 
slavery  will  become  less  and  less  in  the  northern 
church. 

The  border  conferences  and  societies  are  in  a 
position  to  induce  the  northern  church  to  make 
effort  to  gain  them  over ;  to  do  whicli  she  must 
yield  her  professed  opposition  to  slavery.  This 
is  obvious  ;  and  in  the  very  same  proportion  that 
ehe  will  be  influenced  to  make  proselytes,  she  will 
be  influenced  to  give  up  her  apparent  opposition 
to  slavery ;  for  this  must  be  done,  before  the  other 
can  be  done ;  and  by  all  that  the  North  will  be 


FROM  THE  M.  E.  CHURCH.*  187 


tempted  to  swell  her  numbers,  enlarge  her  bor- 
ders,  and  extend  her  dominions  South,  she  will  be 
tempted  to  abate  her  opposition  to  slavery.  And 
it  is  almost  certain  she  will  yield  to  this  powerful 
temptation,  and  slaveholding  go  unrebnked  in 
both  churches.  There  are  many  more  chances 
that  the  division  will  promote  the  interest  of 
slavery,  than  it  will  favor  the  cause  of  freedom. 
There  is  little  or  no  hope  for  the  slave  in  this 
mighty  division. 

"  Commg  events  (often)  cast  their  shadows  be- 
fore," and  the  bodies  of  future  events  are  already 
seen  by  the  shadows.  The  Providence  annual 
conference  at  its  session  since  the  convention, 
passed  the  followmg  resolutions,  with  only  four 
dissenting  votes : 

-■"1.  Resolved,  That  we  are  satisfied  with  the 
disciplme  of  the  church  as  it  now  is,  on  the  sub- 
ject of  slavery;  and  as  we  have  never  proposed 
any  alteration  in  it,  neither  do  we  now ;  and  that 
iu«connection  with  our  brethren  of  other  confer- 
ences, we  will  ever  abide  by  it. 

"  2.  Resolved,  That  we  have  entire  confidence 
in  the  anti-slavery  character  of  our  brethren  of 
the  Baltimore  Confer^ce ;  that  we  greatly  re- 
joice that  they  stand  where  they  have  ever  stood, 
.upon  true  Methodist  ground;  that  we  deeply 
sympathize  with  them  in  all  their  trials,  which 
have  arisen  out  of  their  resolution  to  maintain 
their  integrity ;  aud  that  we  piedge  ourselves  to 


188         "grounds  of  secession 

abide  by  them  in  their  support  of  Methodism,  as 
transmitted  to  us  by  the  fathers." 

Hence  we  have  the  position  of  the  most  or- 
thodox New  England  Episcopal  Methodist  anti- 
slavery.  The  position  of  the  very  heart.  No 
change  in  the  discipline  on  the  subject  of  slavery ; 
never  did  want  any.  The  discipline  ".as  it  is." 
No  objections  to  the  provisions  which  allow 
members  and  local  preachers  to  hold  slaves ;  to 
buy  and  sell  slaves,  (if  they  do  not  engage  in  a 
general  slave  trade  ;  they  are  not  allowed  to  buy 
and  sell  "  men,  women,  and  children,")  and  travel- 
ling preachers  to  do  the  same  thing,  where  the 
laws  of  the  State  forbid  emancipation,  which  is  in 
by  far  the  greater  number  of  the  States.  This  is 
all  right,  just  as  it  should  be.  They  want  no 
change  in  any  of  these  respects ;  never  did  want 
any ;  local  preachers  and  members  may  hold  as 
many  slaves  as  they  want,  buy  and  sell,  where, 
when,  and  to  whom  they  2:)lease,  if  they  stop  short 
of  buying  and  selling  men,  women,  and  children ; 
and  travelling  preachers  may  do  the  same  in  the 
greater  part  of  the  slave  states.  The  anti-slavery 
character  of  the  Baltimore  Conference  is  just 
the  thing.  New  England,wants  no  better  anti- 
slavery.  The  conference  stands,  and  ever  has 
stood,  on  true  Methodist  ground.  The  members 
of  the  church  in  that  conference  hold  slaves,  and 
buy  and  sell  slaves ;  1  knew  one  who  owned 
about  seventy.  The  local  preachers  own.slaves  ; 
I  knew  one  who  owned  about  sixty.  This  is  true 


FROM  THE  M.  E.  CHURCH.  189 


Methodist  auti-slavery  ground.  New-England 
anti-slavery  being  judge ;  by  this  it  is  pledged  to 
stand,  and  ask  no  change.  It  is  true  that  confer- 
ence would  not  let  Mr.  Harding  be  a  travelling 
preacher  unless  he  free  his  slaves,  because  he 
lived  in  Maryland,  where  he  could  emancipate 
them ;  but  they  made  him  a  local  preacher, 
in  possession  of  his  slaves.  This  is  Methodism, 
"  as  transmitted  to  us  by  the  fathers,"  by  which 
the  Providence  Conference  is  pledged  to  abide. 

Was  this  the  anti-slavery  of  the  New  England 
Conference  in  1839,  when  they  wanted  the  general 
rule  so  altered  as  to  make  slaveholding  a  term  of 
membership  ?  And  of  the  great  anti-slavery  con- 
vention of  1843,  which  resolved  that  if  the  Gene- 
ral Conference  of  1844  did  not  entirely  separate 
the  church  from  all  connection  with  slavery, 
it  would  be  no  longer  a  home  for  anti-slavery 
Methodists  1  How  are  the  mighty  fallen  !  The 
Providence  Conference  have  given  up  every  par- 
ticle of  modern  abolitionism  they  ever  had  ;  and 
have  measured  their  whole  length  to  the  pro- 
slavery  of  the  Discipline — have  sanctioned  all  the 
extreme  South  asks,  with  one  exception,  a  slave- 
holding  bishop. 

In  view  of  all  these  facts  and  reasonings,  and 
the  conclusions  to  which  they  irresistably  bring 
us,  what  is  the  duty  of  anti-slavery  Methodists  "? 
Many  of  them  have  felt  and  said  that  they 
could  not,  without  violating  the  plain  commands 
of  God,  remain  in  church  fellowship  with  slave- 


190  GEOUlifDS  OF  SECESSION 


holders  any  longer  than  there  was  a  reasonable 
prospect  of  removing  them  from  the  church. 
Now  that  there  is  no  reasonable  prospect  of 
doing  this,  and  no  prospect  at  all,  and  a  reason- 
able, if  not  certain  prospect,  that  the  church  Avill 
be  far  less  anti-slavery  in  sentiment  and  feeling 
than  formerly,  will  these  j^ersons  continue  in  her 
fellowship  ■?  If  they  do,  their  sun  must  set  in 
blackness.  I  would  say  to  all  anti-slavery  Me- 
thodists, into  whose  hands  this  tract  may  fall,  the 
time  for  decisive  action  has  at  length  come. 
You  were  first  promised  deliverance  from  your 
sinful  connections  with  slaveholders,  by  the  Gene- 
ral Conference  of  1844;  and  secondly  by  the 
Louisville  Convention;  both  are  over,  and  your 
position  is  far  worse  than  it  was  before  they  first 
met;  you  are  not  only  comiected  with  slavery  in 
the  very  way  you  formerly  were,  but  belong  to  a 
church  whose  ministers  are  bound  by  a  solemn 
covenant  never  to  preach  the  Gospel  to  the 
slaves  of  five-sixths  of  the  United  States  ;  and  all 
your  influence  and  support  must  go  to  support 
both  of  these  great  wrongs.  Can  you  continue 
any  longer  in  connection  with  slavery  "?  Can  you 
continue  in  such  a  connection  and  be  guiltless 
before  God  1  You  cannot ;  you  know  you  can- 
not ;  your  own  heart  tells  you  you  cannot.  You 
must  come  out;  you  must  obey  God,  if  you  have 
to  do  as  Abraham  did  when  he  left  his  kindred; 
you  must  obey  God  or  perish.  To  you,  my  dear 
breihren,  this  is  an  awful  subject,  and  I  feel  un- 


FROM  THE  M.   E.  CHURCH. 


191 


ntterable  things  while  I  write.  May  the  gracious 
and  merciful  Saviour  give  you  grace  and  power 
to  do  right,  and  to  do  it  at  the  right  time,  the  only 
time  it  can  be  done,  is  the  sincere  prayer  of  the 
writer. 


THOUGHTS  UPON  SLAVERY 


BY  THE  REV.   JOHN   WESLEY,   A.  M. 


[The  following  was  written  and  published  in  the  year 
n74.  It  will,  therefore,  probably  be  admitted,  that  Mr. 
Wesley  was  an  "  old  fashioned  abolitionist ;"  but  how 
far  he  differed  from  those  of  his  lollowers,  who  are  now 
proscribed,  and  denounced  as  "  modern  abolitionists," 
the  reader  cqn  judge. 

And  here  one  might  ask,  if  our  opponents  of  the  pres- 
ent age  are  "  old  fashioned  abolitionists,"  as  some  of 
them  would  have  us  believe,  why  do  they  not  circulate 
this  tract,  and  thus  spread  their  views  1  If  they  agree 
with  Wesley,  and  others  who  lived  and  labored  with  him 
sixty  years  ago,  why  are  they  so  unwilling  that  this  tract 
should  be  circulated  among  Christians  at  the  present 
time  ?  Nay,  why  do  they  refuse  to  aid  others  in  dispers- 
ing it  through  this  nation,  as  Wesley  himself  dispersed  it 
to  every  part  of  England,  thirteen  years  after  it  was 
written  1    This  we  learn  from  the  following  letter  : — 

To  Mr.  Thomas  Funntll. 

November,  24,  1787. 
My  Dear  Brother, — Whatever  assistance  I  can  give 
those  generous  men  who  join  to  oppose  that  execrable 
trade,  I  certainly  shall  give.  I  have  printed  a  large  edi- 
tion of  tire  "  Thoughts  on  Slavery,"  and  dispersed  therr. 
to  every  part  of  England.  But  there  will  be  vehement 
opposition  made,  both  by  slave  merchants  and  slave- 
holders ;  and  they  are  mighty  men  :  but  our  comfort  is, 
He  that  dvvelleth  on  high  is  mightier.     I  am 

Your  affectionate  brother, 

JOHN  WESLEY 

Let  those  who  have  doubts  about  the  identity  of  Wes- 
Icyan  Methodism,  and  what  they  are  pleased  to  denounce 
as  modern  abolitionism,"  prayerfully  read  ihe  (bllowlng 
pages  ;  they  may  then  be  prepared  to  say  who  have  left 
the  ancient  landmarks.] 

17 


194  THOUGHTS  UPON  SLAVERY, 


SLAVERY. 

1.  1.  By  Slavery,  I  mean  domestic  slavery,  or 
that  of  a  servant  to  a  master.  A  late  ingenious 
writer  well  observes,  "  The  variety  of  forms  in 
which  slavery  appears,  makes  it  almost  impossi- 
ble to  convey  a  just  notion  of  it,  by  way  of  defi- 
nition. There  are,  however,  certain  properties 
which  have  accompanied  slavery  in  most  places, 
whereby  it  is  easily  distinguished  from  that  mild 
domestic  service,  which  obtains  in  our  country." 
(See  Mr.  Hargrave's  Plea  for  Somerset,  the  Negro.) 

2.  Slavery  imports  an  obligation  of  perpetual 
service,  an  obligation  which  only  the  consent  of 
the  master  can  dissolve.  Neither  in  some  coun- 
tries can  the  master  himself  dissolve  it,  without 
the  consent  of  judges  appointed  by  the  law.  It 
generally  gives  the  master  an  arbitrary  power  of 
any  correction  not  affecting  life  or  limb.  Some- 
times even  these  are  exposed  to  his  will,  or  pro- 
tected only  by  a  fine,  or  some  slight  punishment, 
too  inconsiderable  to  restrain  a  master  of  a  harsh 
temper.  It  creates  an  incapacity  of  acquiring 
any  thing,  "except  for  the  master's  benefit.  It 
allows  the  master  to  alienate  the  slave,  in  the 
same  manner  as  his  cows  and  horses.  Lastly,  it 
descends,  in  its  full  extent  from  parent  to  childj 
even  to  the  last  generation. 

3.  The  beginning  of  this  may  be  dated  from  the 
remotest  period  of  which  we  have  an  account  in 
history.   It  commenced  in  the  barbarous  state  oi 


THOUGHTS  UPON   SLAVERY.  195 


society,  and  in  process  of  time  spread  into  all 
nations.  It  prevailed  particularly  among  the 
Jews,  the  Greeks,  the  Romans,  and  the  ancient 
Germans;  and  was  transmitted  by  them  to  the 
various  kingdoms  and  states  which  arose  out  of 
the  Roman  empire.  But  after  Christianity  pre- 
vailed, it  gradually  fell  into  decline  in  almost  all 
parts  of  Europe.  This  great  change  began  in 
Spain  about  the  end  of  the  eighth  century ;  and 
was  become  general  in  most  other  kingdoms  of 
Europe,  before  the  middle  of  the  fourteenth. 

4.  From  this  time  slavery  was  nearly  extinct 
till  the  commencement  of  the  sixteenth  century, 
when  the  discovery  of  America,  and  of  the  west- 
ern and  eastern  coasts  of  Africa,  gave  occasion  to 
the  revival  of  it.  It  took  its  rise  from  the  Portu- 
guese, who,  to  supply  the  Spaniards  with  men  to 
cultivate  their  new  possessions  in  America,  pro- 
cured negroes  from  Africa,  whom  they  sold  for 
slaves  to  the  American  Spaniards.  This  began 
ill  the  year  1508,  when  they  imported  the  first 
negroes  into  Hispaniola.  In  1540,  Charles  the 
Fifth,  then  king  of  Spain,  determined  to  put  an  end 
to  negro  slavery ;  giving  positive  orders  that  all 
the  negro  slaves  in  the  Spanish  dominions  should 
be  set  free.  And  this  was  accordingly  done  by 
Lagasca,  whom  he  sent  and  empowered  to  free 
them  all  on  condition. of  continuing  to  labor  for 
their  masters.  But  soon  after  Lagasca  returned 
to  Spain,  slavery  returned  and  flourished  as  be- 
fore.   Afterward,  other  nations,  as  they  acquired 


196  THOUGHTS  UPON  SLAVERV. 


possessions  in  America,  followed  the  example  of 
the  Spaniards ;  and  slavery  has  taken  deep  root 
in  most  of  our  American  colonies. 

11.  Such  is  the  nature  of  slavery ;  such  the  be- 
ginning of  negro  slavery  in  America.  But  some 
may  desire  to  know  what  kind  of  country  it  is 
from  which  the  negroes  are  brought ;  what  sort 
of  men,  of  what  temper  and  behavior  are  they  in 
their  own  country ;  and  in  what  manner  they  are 
generally  procured,  carried  to,  and  treated,  in 
America. 

1.  And,  First,  what  kind  of  country  is  that  from 
whence  they  are  brought  ?  Is  it  so  remarkably 
horrid,  dreary  and  barren,  that  it  is  a  kindness  to 
deliver  them  out  of  it  ?  I  believe  many  have  ap- 
prehended so  ;  but  it  is  an  entire  mistake,  if  we 
may  give  credit  to  those  who  have  lived  many 
years  therein,  and  could  have  no  motive  to  mis- 
represent it. 

2.  That  part  of  Africa  whence  the  negroes  are 
brought,  commonly  known  by  the  name  of  Guinea, 
extends  along  the  coasts,  in  the  whole,  between 
three  and  four  thousand  miles.  From  the  river 
Senegal,  seventeen  degrees  north  of  the  line,  to 
Cape  Sierra  Leone,  it  contains  seven  hundred 
miles.  Thence  it  runs  eastward  about  fifteen 
hundred  miles,  including  the  Grain  Coast,  the 
Ivory  Coast,  the  Gold  Coast,  and  the  Slave  Coast, 
with  the  large  kingdom  of  Benin.  From  thence 
it  runs  southward,  about  twelve  hundred  miles, 
and  contains  the  kingdoms  of  Congo  and  Angola. 


THOUGHTS  UPON  SLAVERY. 


197 


3.  Concerning  the  first,  the  Senegal  Coast,  Mon- 
sieur Brue,  who  lived  there  sixteen  years,  after 
describing  its  fruitfulness  near  the  sea,  says, 
"The  farther  you  go  from  the  sea,  the  more  fruit- 
ful and  well-improved  is  the  country,  abounding 
in  pulse,  Indian  corn,  and  various  fruits.  Here 
are  vast  meadows,  which  feed  large  herds  of 
great  and  small  cattle ;  and  the  villages,  which 
lie  thick,  show  the  country  is  well  peopled." 
And  again  :  "  I  was  surprised  to  see  the  land  so 
well  cultivated  :  scarce  a  spot  lay  unimproved  ; 
the  low  lands,  divided  by  small  canals,  were  all 
sowed  with  rice  ■  the  higher  grounds  planted 
with  Indian  corn,  and  peas  of  different  sorts. 
Their  beef  is  excellent;  poultry  plenty,  and  very 
cheap,  as  are  all  the  necessaries  of  life." 

4.  As  to  the  Grain  and  Ivory  Coasts,  we  learn 
from  eye  witnesses,  that  the  soil  is  in  general  fer- 
tile, producing  abundance  of  rice  and  roots.  In- 
digo and  cotton  thrive  without  cultivation ;  fish 
is  in  great  plenty  ;  the  flocks  and  herds  are  nume- 
rous, and  the  trees  laden  with  fruit. 

5.  The  Gold  Coast  and  Slave  Coast,  all  who 
have  seen  it  agree,  is  exceedingly  fruitful  and 
pleasant,  producing  vast  quantities  of  rice  and 
other  grain,  plenty  of  fruit  and  roots,  palm  wine 
and  oil,  and  fish  in  great  abundance,  with  much 
tame  and  wild  cattle.  The  very  same  account 
is  given  us  of  the  soil  and  produce  of  the  king- 
doms of  Benin,  Congo,  and  Angola.    From  all 


198 


THOUGHTS  UPON  SLAVERY. 


which  it  appears,  that  Guinea,  in  general,  is  far 
from  a  horrid,  dreary,  barren  country — is  one  of 
the  most  fruitful,  as  well  as  the  most  pleasant 
countries  in  the  known  world.  It  is  said  indeed 
to  be  unhealthy;  and  so  it  is  to  strangers,  but 
perfectly  healthy  to  the  native  inhabitants. 

6.  Such  is  the  country  from  which  the  negroes 
are  brought.  We  come  next  to  inquire  what  sort 
of  men  they  are,  of  what  temper  and  behavior, 
not  in  our  plantations,  but  in  their  native  country. 
And  here  likewise  the  surest  way  is  to  take  our 
account  from  eye  and  ear  witnesses.  Now,  those 
who  have  lived  in  the  Senegal  country  observe, 
it  is  inhabited  by  three  nations,  the  Jalofs,  Fulis, 
and  Mandingos.  The  king  of  the  Jalofs  has  un- 
der him  several  ministers,  who  assist  in  the  exer- 
cise of  justice.  The  chief  justice  goes  in  circuit 
through  all  his  dominions,  to  hear  complaints  and 
determine  controversies;  and  the  viceroy  goes 
with  him,  to  inspect  the  behavior  of  the  alkadi, 
or  governor  of  each  village.  The  Fulis  are  gov- 
erned by  their  chief  men,  who  rule  with  much 
moderation.  Few  of  them  will  drink  anything 
stronger  than  water,  being  strict  Mohammedans. 
The  government  is  easy,  because  the  people  are 
of  a  quiet  and  good  disposition,  and  so  well 
instructed  in  what  is  right,  that  a  man  who 
wrongs  another  is  the  abomination  of  all.  They 
desure  no  more  land  than  they  use,  which  they 
cultivate  with  great  care  anc5  industry  ;  if  any  of 
them  are  known  to  be  made  slaves  by  the  white 


THOUGHTS  UPON  SLAVERY. 


199 


men,  they  all  join  to  redeem  them.  They  not  only 
support  all  tha»  are  old,  or  blind,  or  lame  among 
themselves,  but  have  frequently  supplied  the  ne- 
cessities of  the  Mandingos,  when  they  were  dis- 
tressed by  famine. 

7.  "  The  Mandingos,"  says  Monsieur  Brae,  "  are 
rigid  Mohammedans,  drinking  neither  wine  nor 
brandy.  They  are  industrious  and  laborious, 
keeping  their  ground  well  cultivated,  and  breed- 
ing a  good  stock  of  cattle.  Every  town  has  a 
governor,  and  he  appoints  the  labor  of  the  peo- 
ple. The  men  work  the  ground  designed  for 
corn;  the  women  and  girls,  the  rice  ground.  He 
afterwards  divides  the  corn  and  rice  among  them  ; 
and  decides  all  quarrels,  if  any  arise.  All  the 
Mohammedan  negroes  constantly  go  to  public 
prayers  thrice  a  day ;  there  being  a  priest  in  every 
village,  who  regularly  calls  them  together ;  and  it 
is  surprising  to  see  the  modesty,  attention,  and 
reverence  which  they  observe  during  their  wor- 
ship. These  three  nations  practice  several  trades; 
they  have  smiths,  saddlers,  potters,  and  weavers ; 
and  they  are  very  ingenious  at  their  several  oc- 
cupations. Their  smiths  not  only  make  all  the 
instraments  of  iron  which  they  have  occasion  to 
use,  but  likewise  work  many  things  neatly  in 
gold  and  silver.  It  is  chiefly  the  women  and 
children  Avho  weave  fine  cotton  cloth,  which 
they  dye  blue  and  black." 

8.  It  was  of  these  parts  of  Guinea  that  Monsieur 
Allanson,  correspondent  of  the  Royal  Academy  of 


200  THOUGHTS  UPON  SLAVERY. 


Sciences  at  Paris,  from  1749  to  1753,  gives  the 
following  account,  both  as  to  the  country  and 
people  : — "  Which  way  soever  I  turned  my  eyes, 
I  beheld  a  perfect  image  of  pure  nature :  an 
agreeable  ^solitude,  bounded  on  every  side  by  a 
charming  landscape ;  the  rural  situation  of  cot- 
tages in  the  midst  of  "trees;  the  ease  and  quiet- 
ness of  the  negroes,  reclined  under  the  shade  of 
the  spreading  foliage,  with  the  simplicity  of  their 
dress  and  manners;  the  whole  revived  in  my 
mind  the  idea  of  our  first  parents,  and  I  seemed 
to  contemplate  the  world  in  its  primitive  state. 
They  are,  generally  speaking,  very  good-natured, 
sociable,  and  obliging.  I  was  not  a  little  pleased 
with  my  very  first  reception;  and  it  fully  con- 
vinced me,  that  there  ought  to  be  a  considerable 
abatement  made  in  the  accounts  we  have  of  the 
savage  character  of  the  Africans."  He  adds : 
"  It  is  amazing  that  an  illiterate  people  should 
reason  so  pertinently  concerning  the  heavenly 
bodies.  There  is  no  doubt,  but  that,  with  proper 
instruments,  they  would  become  excellent  astron- 
omers." 

9.  The  inhabitants  of  the  Grain  and  Ivory  Coast 
are  represented  by  those  that  deal  with  them,  as 
sensible,  courteous,  and  the  fairest  traders  on  the 
coasts  of  Guinea.  They  rarely  drink  to  excess  ; 
if  any  do,  they  are  severely  punished  by  the 
king's  order.  They  are  seldom  troubled  with 
war  ;  if  a  difference  happen  between  two  nations, 
they  commonly  end  the  dispute  amicably. 


THOUGHTS  UPON  SLAVERY.  201 


The  inhabitants  of  the  Gold  and  Slave  Coast, 
likewise,  when  they  are  not  artfully  incensed 
against  each  other,  live  in  great  union  and  friend- 
ship, being  generally  well  tempered,  civil,  tracti- 
ble,  and  ready  to  help  any  that  need  it.  In  par 
ticular,  the  natives  of  the  kingdom  of  Whidah  art 
civil,  kind,  and  obliging,  to  strangers  ;  and  thej 
are  the  most  gentleman-like  of  all  the  negroes 
abounding  in  good  manners  toward  each  other 
The  inferiors  pay  the  ntmost  respect  to  their  su- 
periors ;  so  wives  to  their  husbands,  children  to 
their  parents.  And  they  are  remarkably  indus- 
trious ;  all  are  constantly  employed, — the  men  in 
agriculture,  the  women  in  spimiing  and  weaving 
cotton. 

10.  The  Gold  and  Slave  Coasts  are  divided  into 
several  districts,  some  governed  by  kings,  others 
by  the  ])rincipal  men,  who  take  care  each  of  their 
own  town  or  village,  and  prevent  or  ajjpease 
tumults.  They  punish  murder  and  adultery 
severely  ;  very  frequently  with  death.  Theft  and 
robbery  are  punished  by  a  fine  proportionable  to 
the  goods  that  were  taken.  All  the  natives  of 
this  coast,  though  Heathens,  believe  there  is  one 
God,  the  Author  of  them  and  all  things.  They  ap- 
pear likewise  to  have  a  confused  apprehension  of 
a  future  state.  And,  accordingly,  every  town  and 
village  has  a  place  of  public  worship.  It  is  re- 
markable that  they  have  no  beggars  among  them ; 
such  is  the  care  of  the  chief  men,  m  every  city 
and  village,  to  provide  some  easy  labor  even  for 


202 


THOUGHTS  UPON  SLAVERY- 


the  old  and  weak.  Some  are  employed  in  blow- 
ing the  smith's  bellows  ;  others  in  pressing  palm 
oil ;  others  in  grinding  of  colors.  If  they  are  too 
weak  even  for  this,  they  sell  provisions  in  the 
market. 

11.  The  natives  of  the  kingdom  of  Benin  are  a 
reasonable  and  good-natured  people.  They  are 
sincere  and  inoffensive,  and  do  no  injustice  either 
to  one  another  or  to  strangers.  They  are  emi- 
nently civil  and  courteous ;  if  you  make  them  a 
present,  they  endeavor  to  repay  it  double ;  and 
if  they  are  trusted  till  the  ship  returns  the  nfext 
year,  they  are  sure  honestly  to  pay  the  whole 
debt.  Theft  is  punished  among  them,  although 
not  with  the  same  severity  as  murder.  If  a  man 
and  woman  of  any  quality  are  taken  in  adultery, 
they  are  certain  to  be  put  to  death,  and  their 
bodies  thrown  on  a  dunghill,  and  left  a  prey 
to  wild  beasts.  They  are  jiunctually  just  and 
honest  in  their  dealings ;  and  are  also  very 
charitable,  the  king  and  the  great  lords  taking  care 
to  employ  all  that  are  capable  of  any  work. 
And  those  that  are  utterly  helpless  they  keep  for 
God's  sake;  so  that  here  also  are  no  beggars. 
The  inhabitants  of  Congo  and  Angola  are  gene- 
rally a  quiet  people.  They  discover  a  good 
imderstanding,  and  behave  in  a  friendly  manner 
to  strangers,  being  of  a  mild  temper  and  an  affa- 
ble carriage.  Upon  the  whole,  therefore,  the 
negroes  who  inhabit  the  coast  of  Africa,  from  the 
river  iienegal  to  the  southern  bounds  of  Angola, 


THOUGHTS  UPON  SLAVERY. 


203 


are  so  farfrom  being  the  stnijid,  senseless,  bmitish, 
lazy  barbarians,  the  fierce,  cruel,  perfidious  sav- 
ages they  have  been  described,  that,  on  the  con- 
trary, they  are  represented,  by  those  who  have  no 
motive  to  flatter  them,  as  remarkably  sensible, 
considering  the  few  advantages  they  have  for 
improving  their  understanding;  as  industrious  to 
the  highest  degree,  perhaps  more  so  than  any 
other  natives  of  so  warm  a  climate ;  as  fair,  just, 
cind  honest  in  all  their  dealings,  unless  where  white 
men  have  taught  them  to  be  other^vise ;  and  as 
far  more  mild,  friendly,  and  kind  to  strangers, 
than  any  of  our  forefathers  were.  Our  forefathers  7 
Where  shall  we  find  at  this  day,  among  the  fair- 
faced  natives  of  Europe,  a  nation  generally  prac- 
ticing the  justice,  mercy,  and  truth,  Avhich  are 
found  among  these  poor  Africans  ?  Suppose  the 
preceding  accounts  are  true  (which  I  see  no 
reason  or  pretence  to  doubt  of),  and  we  may  leave 
England  and  France,  to  seek  genuhie  honesty  in 
Benin,  Congo,  or  Angola. 

III.  We  have  now  seen  what  kind  of  country  it 
is  from  which  the  negroes  are  brought;  and  what 
sort  of  men  (even  white  men  being  the  judges) 
they  were  in  their  own  country.  Inquire  we, 
Thirdly,  in  what  manner  are  they  generally  pro- 
cured, carried  to,  and  treated,  in  America  ? 

1.  First.  In  what  manner  are  they  procured  ? 
Part  of  them  by  fraud.  Captains  of  ships,  from 
time  to  time,  have  invited  negroes  to  come 
on  board,  and  then  carried  them  away.    But  far 


204  THOUGHTS  UPON  SLAVERY. 


more  have  been  procured  by  force.  The  Chris- 
tians, landing  upon  their  coasts,  seized  as  many 
as  they  found — men,  women,  and  children — and 
transported  them  to  America.  It  was  about  1551 
that  the  EngUsh  began  trading  to  Guinea ;  at  first, 
for  gold  and  elepliant's  teeth,  but  soon  after  for 
men.  In  1556,  Sir  John  Hawkins  sailed  with  two 
ships  to  Cape  Verd,  where  he  sent  eighty  men  on 
shore  to  catch  negroes.  But  the  natives  flying, 
they  fell  farther  down,  and  there  set  the  men  on 
shore,  "  to  burn  their  towns  and  take  the  inhabit- 
ants." But  they  met  with  such  resistance,  that 
they  had  seven  men  killed,  and  took  but  ten 
negroes.  So  they  went  still  farther  down,  till, 
having  taken  enough,  they  proceeded  to  the  West 
Indies  and  sold  them. 

2.  It  was  some  time  before  the  Europeans 
found  a  more  compendious  way  of  procuring 
African  slaves,  by  prevailing  upon  them  to  make 
war  upon  each  other,  and  to  sell  their  prisoners. 
Till  then  they  seldom  had  any  wars but  were  in 
general  quiet  and  peaceable.  But  the  white  men 
first  taught  them  drunkenness  and  avarice,  and 
then  hired  them  to  sell  one  another.  Nay,  by  this 
means,  even  their  kings  are  induced  to  sell  their 
own  subjects.  So  Mr.  Moore,  factor  of  the 
African  Company  in  1730,  informs  us :  "  When  the 
king  of  Barsalli  wants  goods  or  brandy,  he  sends 
to  the  English  governor  at  James'  Fort,  who 
immediately  sends  a  sloop.  Against  the  time  it 
arrives,  he  plunders  some  of  his  neighbors'  towns, 


THOUGHTS  UPON  SLAVERY.  205 

selling  the  people  for  the  goods  he  wants.  At 
other  times,  he  falls  upon  one  of  his  own  towns, 
and  makes  bold  to  sell  his  own  subjects."  So 
Monsieur  Brue  says,  "  I  wrote  to  the  king  "  (not 
the  same),  "if  he  had  a  sufRcient  number  of 
slaves,  I  would  treat  with  him."  He  seized 
three  hundred  of  his  own  people,  and  sent  word 
he  was  ready  to  deliver  them  for  the  goods." 
He  adds,  "  Some  of  the  natives  are  always  ready" 
(when  well  paid)  "  to  surprise  and  carry  off  their 
own  countrymen.  They  come  at  night  without 
noise,  and  if  they  find  any  lone  cottage,  surround 
it,  and  carry  off  all  the  people."  Barbot,  another 
French  factor  says,  "  Many  of  the  slaves  sold  by 
the  negroes  are  prisoners  of  war,  or  taken  in  the 
incursions  they  make  into  the  enemi»s'  ter- 
ritories. Others  are  stolen.  Abundance  of  little 
blacks,  of  both  sexes,  are  stolen  away  by  their 
neighbors,  when  found  abroad  on  the  road,  or  in. 
the  woods,  or  else  in  the  corn  fields,  at  the  time 
of  the  year  when  their  parents  keep  them  there 
all  day  to  scare  away  the  devouring  birds." 
That  their  own  parents  sell  them  is  utterly  false  : 
whites,  not  blacks,  are  without  natural  affec- 
tion! 

3.  To  set  the  manner  wherein  negroes  are  pro- 
cured in  a  yet  stronger  light,  it  will  suffice  to  give 
an  extract  of  "  Two  voyages  to  Guinea"  on  this 
account.  The  first  is  taken  verbatim  from  the 
original  manuscript  of  the  surgeon's  journal 

"  Sestro,  Dec.  29, 1724.— No  trade  to-day,  thougt 
18 


206  THOUGHTS   UPON  SLAVERY. 


many  traders  came  on  board.  They  informed  us, 
that  the  people  are  gone  to  war  within  land,  and 
will  bring  prisoners  enough  in  two  or  three  days; 
in  hopes  of  which  we  stay. 

"  The  30th. — No  trade  yet;  but  our  traders  came 
on  board  to-day,  and  informed  us  the  people  had 
burnt  four  towns ;  so  that  to-morrow  we  expect 
slaves  off. 

"  The  31st. — Fair  weather ;  but  no  trading  yet. 
We  see  each  night  towns  burning.  But  we  hear 
many  of  the  Sestro  men  are  killed  by  the  inland 
negroes ;  so  that  we  fear  this  war  will  be  unsuc- 
cessful. 

"The  2d  of  January. — Last  night  we  saw  a  pro- 
digious fire  break  out  about  eleven  o'clock,  and 
this  morning  see  the  town  of  Sestro  burned  down 
to  the  ground."  (It  contained  some  hundred 
houses.)  "  So  that  we  find  their  enemies  are  too 
hard  for  them  at  jjresent,  and  consequently  our 
trade  spoiled  here.  Therefore  about  seven  o'clock 
we  weighed  anchor,  to  proceed  lower  down." 

4.  The  second  extract,  taken  from  the  journal 
of  a  surgeon,  who  went  from  New  York  on  the 
same  trade,  is  as  follows  :  "The  commander  of 
the  vessel  sent  to  acquaint  the  king,  that  he 
wanted  a.  cargo  of  slaves.  The  king  promised  to 
furnish  him ;  and  in  order  to  it,  set  out,  designing 
to  surprise  some  town,  and  make  all  the  people 
prisoners.  Some  time  after,  the  king  sent  him 
word,  he  had  not  yet  met  with  the  desired  suc- 
cess; having  attempted  to  break  up  two  townS) 


THOUGHTS   UPON  SLAVERY.  207 


but  having  been  twice  repulsed ;  but  that  he  still 
hoped  to  procure  the  number  of  slaves.  In  this 
design  he  persisted,  till  he  met  his  enemies  in  the 
field.  A  battle  was  fought  which  lasted  three 
days.  And  the  engagement  was  so  bloody,  that 
four  thousand  five  hundred  men  were  slain  upon 
\lie  spot."  Such  is  the  manner  wherein  the  ne- 
groes are  procured  !  Thus  the  Christians  preach 
the  Gospel  to  the  Heathens ! 

5.  Thus  they  are  procured.  But  in  what  num- 
bers and  in  what  manner  are  they  carried  to 
America  "?  Mr.  Anderson,  in  his  History  of  Trade 
and  Commerce,  observes  :  "  England  supplies  her 
American  colonies  with  negro  slaves,  amounting 
in  number  to  about  a  hundred  thousand  every 
year;"  that  is,  so  many  are  taken  on  board  our 
ships ;  but  at  least  ten  thousand  of  them  die  in 
the  voyage  ;  about  a  fourth  part  more  die  at  the 
different  islands,  in  what  is  called  the  seasoning. 
So  that  at  an  average,  in  the  passage  and  season- 
ing together,  thirty  thousand  die;  that  is,  properly, 
are  murdered.  0  earth,  0  sea,  cover  not  thou 
their  blood ! 

6.  When  they  are  brought  down  to  the  shore 
in  order  to  be  sold,  our  surgeons  thoroughly  ex- 
amine them,  and  that  quite  naked,  women  and 
men,  without  any  distinction ;  those  that  are  ap- 
proved are  set  on  one  side.  In  the  mean  time,  a 
burning  iron,  with  the  arms  or  name  of  the  com- 
pany, lies  in  the  fire,  with  which  they  are  marked 
on  the  breast.  Before  they  are  put  into  the  ships, 

19 


208  THOUGHTS  UPON  SLAVERY. 


their  masters  strip  them  of  all  they  have  on  their 
backs":  so  that  they  come  on  board  stark  naked, 
women  as  well  as>men.  It  is  common  for  several 
hnndred  of  them  to  be  put  on  board  one  vessel, 
where  they  are  stowed  together  in  as  little  room 
as  it  is  possible  for  them  to  be  crowded.  It  is 
easy  to  snppose  what  a  condition  they  must  soon 
be  in,  between  heat,  thirst,  and  stench  of  various 
kinds.  So  that  it  is  no  wonder,  so  many  should 
die  in  the  passage  ;  but  rather,  that  any  survive  it. 

7.  When  the  vessels  arrive  at  their  destined 
port,  the  negroes  are  again  exposed  naked  to  the 
eyes  of  all  that  flock  together,  and  the  examina- 
tion of  their  purchasers.  Then  they  are  separated 
to  the  plantations  of  their  several  masters,  to  see 
each  other  no  more.  Here  you  may  see  mothers 
hanging  over  their  daughters,  bedewing  their 
naked  breasts  with  tears,  and  daughters  clinging 
to  their  parents,  till  the  whipper  soon  obligea 
them  to  part.*  And  what  can  be  more  wretched 
than  the  condition  they  then  enter  upon  ?  Ban- 
ished from  their  counrry,  from  their  friends  and 
relations  forever,  from  every  comfort  of  life,  they 
are  reduced  to  a  state  scarce  any  way  preferable 
to  that  of  beasts  of  burden.    In  general,  a  few 

*  These  scenes  ocRur  almost  daily  at  the  present  time 
in  the  United  States,  in  the  prosecution  of  the  domestic 
slave  trade.  It  is  estimated  tluit  Vii-£;inia  alone  exports 
to  the  Southern  and  Western  markets  TEN  THOUSAND 
SLAVES  annually.  Reader,  .judge  of  the  aiigiiish  and 
tears  this  must  cause. — Pub.  Committee. 


THOUGHTS  UPON  SLAVERY.  209 


roots,  not  of  the  nicest  kind,  tisnally  yams  or  po- 
tatoes, are  their  food  ;  and  two  rags,  that  neither 
screen  them  from  the  heat  of  the  day,  nor  the 
cold  of  the  night,  their  covering.  Their  sleep 
is  veiy  short,  their  labor  continual,  and  frequently 
above  their  strength  ;  so  that  death  sets  many  of 
them  at  liberty  before  they  have  lived  out  half 
their  days.  The  time  they  work  in  the  West  In- 
dies, is  from  day  break  to  noon^  and  from  tv/o 
o'clock  till  dark;  during  which  time  they  are 
attended  by  overseers,  who,  if  they  think  thern 
dilatory,  or  think  any  thing  not  so  well  done  as  it 
should  be,  whip  them  most  unmercifully,  so  that 
you  may  see  their  bodies  long  after  pealed  and 
scarred  tisually  from  the  shoulders  to  the  waist. 
And  before  they  are  suffered  to  go  to  their  quar- 
ters, they  have  commonly  something  to  do,  as 
coUectiiig  herbage  for  thi  horses,  or  gathering 
fuel  for  the  boilers ;  so  that  it  is  often  past  twelve 
before  they  can  get  home.  Hence  if  their  food  is 
not  prepared,  they  are  sometimes  called  to  labor 
again,  before  they  can  satisfy  their  hunger.  And 
no  excuse  will  avail.  If  they  are  not  in  the  field 
immediately  they  must  expect  to  feel  the  lash. 
Did  the  Creator  intend  that  the  noblest  creatures 
in  the  visible  world  should  live  such  a  life  as 
this? 

Are  these  thy  glorious  work,  Parent  of  good? 
8.  As  to  the  punishments  inflicted  on  them, 
says  Sir  Hans  Sloane,  "they  frequently  geld  them, 
18* 


210  THOUGHTS  UPON  SLAVERY. 


or  chop  off  half  a  foot :  after  they  are  whipped 
till  they  are  raw  all  over,  some  put  pepper  and 
salt  upon  them ;  some  drop  melted  wax  upon 
their  skin  ;  others  cut  off  their  ears,  and  constrain 
ihem  to  broil  and  eat  them.  For  rebellion"  (that 
is,  asserting  their  native  liberty,  which  they  have 
as  much  right  to  as  to  the  air  they  breathe),  "  they 
fasten  them  down  to  the  ground  with  crooked 
sticks  on  every  limb,  and  then  applying  fire^  by 
degrees,  to  the  feet  and  hands,  they  burn  them 
gradually  upward  to  the  head." 

9.  But  will  not  the  laws  made  in  the  planta- 
tions prevent  or  redress  all  cruelty  and  oppres- 
sion 1  We  will  take  but  a  few  of  those  laws  for  a 
specimen,  and  then  let  any  man  judge. 

In  order  to  rivet  the  chain  of  slavery,  the  law 
of  Virginia  ordains  :  "  That  no  slave  shall  be  set 
free  under  any  pretence  whatever,  except  for 
some  meritorious  services,  to  be  adjudged  and 
allowed  by  the  governor  and  council;  and  that 
where  any  slave  shall  be  set  free  by  his  owner, 
otherwise  than  is  herein  directed,  the  church- 
wardens of  the  parish,  wherein  such  negroes  shall 
reside  for  the  space  of  one  month,  are  hereby 
authorized  and  required  to  take  up  and  sell  the 
said  negro  by  public  outcry." 

JO.  Will  not  these  laAVgivers  take  effectual  care 
to  prevent  cruelty  and  oppression  ? 

The  law  of  Jamaica  ordains :  "  Every  slave 
that  shall  run  away,  and  continue  absent  from  his 
master  twelve  months,  shall  be  deemed  rebel- 


THOUGHTS  UPON  S1,AVERT- 


211 


lions."  And  by  another  law  fifty  pounds  are 
allowed  to  those  who  kill  or  bring  in  alive  a  re- 
bellious slave.  So  their  law  treats  these  poor 
men  with  as  little  ceremony  and  consideration,  as 
if  they  were  merely  brute  beasts!  But  the  inno- 
cent blood  which  is  shed  in  consequence  of  such 
a  detestable  law,  must  call  for  vengeance  on  the 
murderous  abettors  and  actors  of  such  deliberate 
wickedness. 

11.  But  the  law  of  Baibadoes  exceeds  even 
this :  "  If  any  negro  under  punishment,  by  his 
master,  or  his  order,  for  running  away  or  any 
other  crime  or  misdemeanor,  shall  suffer  in  life  or 
member,  no  person  whatsoever  shall  be  liable  to 
any  fine  therefor.  But  if  any  man,  of  wanton- 
ness, or  only  of  bloody-mindedness,  or  cruel 
intention,  wilfully  kill  a  negro  of  his  own,"  (now, 
observe  the  severe  punishment !)  "he  shall  pay 
into  the  public  treasury  fifteen  pounds  sterling ! 
and  not  be  liable  to  any  other  punishment  or  for. 
feiture  for  the  same  !" 

Nearly  allied  to  this  is  that  law  of  Virginia : 
"  After  proclamation  is  issued  against  slaves  that 
runaway,  it  is  lawful  for  any  person  whatsoevei 
to  kill  and  destroy  such  slaves,  by  such  ways  and 
means  as  he  shall  think  fit." 

We  have  already  seen  some  of  the  ways  and 
means  which  have  been  thought  fit  on  such  occa- 
sions; and  many  more  niight  be  mentioned.  One 
gentleman,  when  I  was  abroad,  thought  fit  to 
roast  his  slave  alive  !  But  if  the  most  natural 
19* 


212  THOITGHTS  DPON  SLAVERY 


act  of  "running  away"  from  intolerable  cjranny, 
deserves  such  relentless  severity,  what  punish- 
ment have  these  lawmakers  to  expect  hereafter, 
on  account  of  their  own  enormous  offences  1 

IV.  1.  This  is  the  plain  unaggravated  mat- 
ter of  fact.  Such  is  the  manner  wherein  our 
African  slaves  are  procured ;  such  the  manner 
w^'herein  they  are  removed  from  their  native  land, 
and  wherein  they  are  treated  in  our  plantations. 
I  would  now  inquire  whether  these  things  can  be 
defended,  on  the  principle  of  even  Heathen  hon- 
esty ;  whether  they  can  be  reconciled  (setting 
the  Bible  out  of  the  question)  with  any  degree  of 
either  justice  or  mercy. 

2.  The  grand  pica  is,  "  They  are  authorized  by 
law."  But  can  law,  human  law,  change  the  na- 
ture of  things  ?  Can  it  turn  darkness  into  light, 
or  evil  into  good  ?  By  no  means.  Notwithstand- 
ing ten  thousand  laws,  right  is  right,  and  wrong  m 
wrong  still.  There  must  still  remain  an  essential 
difference  between  justice  and  injustice,  cruelty 
and  mercy.  So  that  I  still  ask.  Who  can  recon- 
cile this  treatment  of  the  negroes,  first  and  last 
with  either  mercy  or  justice  ? 

Where  is  the  justice  of  inflicting  the  severest, 
evils  on  those  that  have  done  us  no  wrong  ?  of 
depriving  those  that  never  injured  us  in  word  or 
deed,  of  every  comfort  of  life  ?  of  tearing  them 
from  their  native  country,  and  depriving  them  of 
liberty  itself,  of  which  an  Angolan  has  the  same 
natural'  right  as  an  Englishman,  and  on  which  he 


THOUGHTS  UPON  SLAVERY. 


218 


sets  as  high  a  value  1  Yea,  where  is  the  justice 
of  taking  away  the  lives  of  innocent,  inoffensive 
men ;  murdering  thousands  of  them  in  their  own 
land,  by  the  hands  of  their  own  countrymen ; 
many  thousands,  year  after  year,  on  shipboard, 
and  then  casting  them  like  dung  into  the  sea  ;  and 
tens  of  thousands  in  that  cruel  slaveiy  to  which 
they  are  so  unjustly  reduced  1 

3.  But  waiving,  for  the  present,  all  other  con- 
siderations, I  strike  at  the  root  of  this  complicated 
villainy,  I  absolutely  deny  all  slaveholding  to  be  con- 
sistent with  any  degree  of  natural  justice. 

I  cannot  place  this  in  a  clearer  light  than  that 
great  ornament  of  his  profession,  Judge  Black- 
stone,  has  already  done.  Part  of  his  words  are 
as  follows  : 

"  The  three  origins  of  the  right  of  slavery  assigned  by 
Justinian,  are  all  built  upon  false  foundations:  (1.) 
Slavery  is  said  to  arise  from  captivity  in  war.  The  con- 
queror having  a  right  to  the  life  of  his  captive,  if  ho 
spares  that,  has  then  a  right  to  deal  with  him  as  he 
pleases.  But  this  is  untrue,  if  taken  generally, — that,  by 
the  laws  of  nations,  a  man  has  a  right  to  kill  his  enemy. 
He  lias  only  a  right  to  kill  him  in  particular  cases,  in 
cases  of  absolute  necessity  for  self-defence.  And  it  is 
plain,  this  absolute  necessity  did  not  subsist,  since  he  did 
not  kill  him,  but  made  him  prisoner.  War  itself  is  jus- 
tifiable only  on  principles  of  self-preservation:  therefore 
it  gives  us  no  right  over  prisoners,  but  to  hinder  their 
hurting  us  by  confining  them.  Much  less  can  it  give  a 
light  to  torture,  or  kill,  or  even  to  enrlave  fui  enemy  when 
tne  war  is  over.  Since  dierefore  the  riglit  of  making  our 
prisoners  sldves,  depends  on  a  supposed  right  of  slaughter, 
that  foundation  failing,  the  consequence  which  is  drawn 
from  it,  must  fail  likewise. 

"  It  is  said,  secondly,  slavery  may  begm  by  one  man's 


214  THOUGHTS  UPON  SLAVERY. 


Belling  himself  to  another.  And  it  is  true,  a  man  may 
sell  himself  to  woA  for  another ;  but  he  cannot  sell  him- 
self to  be  a  slave,  as  above  defined.  Every  sale  implies 
an  equivalent  given  to  the  seller,  in  lieu  of  what  he 
transfers  to  the  buyer.  But  what  equivalent  can  be  given 
ior  life  or  liberty  1  His  property  likewise,  with  the  very 
price  which  he  seems  to  receive,  devolves  ipso  facto  to 
his  master,  the  instant  he  becomes  his  slave :  in  this  case, 
therefore,  the  buyer  gives  nothing,  and  the  seller  receives 
nothing.  Of  what  validity  then,  can  a  *Ie  be,  which 
destroys  the  very  principles  upon  which  all  sales  are 
founded  "? 

"  We  are  tokl,  thirdly,  that  men  ma.y  be  born  slaves,* 
by  being  the  children  ol  slaves.  But  this,  being  built 
upon  the  two  former  rights,  must  fall  together  with  them. 
If  neither  captivity  nor  contract  can,  by  the  plain  law  of 
nature  and  reason,  reduce  the  parent  to  a  state  of  slave  - 
ry, much  less  can  they  reduce  the  offspring."  It  clearly 
follows,  that  all  slavery  is  as  irreconcilable  to  justice  as 
to  mercy. 

4.  That  slavelioldiiig  is  utterly  inconsistent  with 
mercy,  is  almost  too  plain  to  need  a  proof.  In- 
deed, it  is  said,  "  that  these  negroes  being  prison- 
ers of  war,  our  captains  and  factors  buy  them, 
merely  to  save  them  from  being  put  to  death. 
And  is  this  not  mercy]"  I  answer,  (1.)  Did  Sir 
John  Hawkins,  and  many  others,  seize  upon  men, 
women,  and  children,  who  were  at  peace  in  their 
own  fields  or  bouses,  merely  to  save  them  from 
death  ?  (2.)  Was  it  to  save  them  from  death,  that 
they  knocked  out  the  brains  of  those  they  could 
not  bring  away  ?  (S.)  Who  occasioned  and  fo- 
mented those  wars,  wherein  these  poor  creatures 
were  taken  prisoners  1     Who  excited  them  by 

*  See  our  Declaration  of  Irulependeuce- 


THOUGHTS  UPON  SLAVERY. 


215 


money,  by  drink,  by  every  possible  means,  to  fall 
upon  one  another  ?  Was  it  not  themselves  ? 
They  know  in  their  own  conscience  it  was,  if 
they  have  any  conscience  left.  But  (4.)  to  bring 
the  matter  to  a  short  issue,  can  they  say  before 
God,  that  they  ever  took  a  single  voyage,  or 
bought  a  single  negro,  from  this  motive  1  They 
cannot ;  they  well  know,  to  get  money,  not  to 
save  lives  was  the  whole  and  sole-sprmg  of  their 
motions. 

5.  But  if  this  manner  of  procuring  and  treating 
negroes  is  not  consistent  either  with  raercy  or 
justice,  yet  there  is  a  plea  for  it  which  every  man 
of  business  will  acknowledge  to  be  quite  suffi- 
cient. Fifty  years  ago,  one  meeting  an  eminent 
statesman  in  the  lobby  of  the  house  of  commons 
said,  "  You  have  been  long  talking  about  justice 
and  equity.  Pray  which  is  this  bill,  equity  or  jus- 
tice 1  He  answered  very  short  and  plain,  "  D — n 
justice ;  it  is  necessity."  Here  also  the  slaveholder 
fixes  his  foot ;  here  he  rests  the  strength  of  his 
cause.  '•  If  it  is  not  quite  right,  yet  it  must  be  so  ; 
there  is  an  absolute  necessity  for  it.  It  is  neces- 
sary we  should  procure  slaves ;  and  when  we  have 
procured  them,  it  is  necessary  to  use  them  with 
severity,  considering  their  stupidity,  stubbormaess 
and  wickedness." 

I  answer,  you  stumble  at  the  threshold ;  I  deny 
that  villainy  is  ever  necessary.  It  is  impossible 
that  it  should  ever  be  necessary  for  any  reasona- 
ble creature  to  violate  all  the  laws  of  justice, 


216  THOUGHTS  UPON  SLAVERY. 


mercy,  and  truth.  No  circumstances  can  make 
it  necessary  for  a  man  to  burst  in  sunder  all  the  ties 
of  humanity.  It  can  never  be  necessary  for  a  ra- 
tional being  to  sink  himself  below  a  bnite.  A 
man  can  be  under  no  necessity  of  degrading  him- 
self into  a  wolf.  The  absurdity  of  the  supposi- 
tion is  so  glaring,  that  one  would  wonder  any 
one  can  help  seeing  it. 

6.  This  in  general.  But  to  be  more  particular, 
I  ask,  First,  what  is  necessary  ?  and,  Secondly, 
To  what  end  f  It  may  be  answered,  "  The  whole 
method  now  used  by  the  original  purchasers  of 
negroes  is  necessary  to  the  furnishing  our  colo- 
nies yearly  with  a  hundred  thousand  slaves."  I 
grant,  this  is  necessary  to  that  end.  But  how  is 
that  end  necessary  1  How  will  you  prove  it  ne- 
cessary that  one  hundred,  that  one,  of  those  slaves 
should  be  procured  '?  "  Why,  it  is  necessary  to  my 
gaining  a  hundred  thousand  pounds."  Perhaps 
so  ;  but  how  is  this  necessary  1  It  is  very  possi- 
ble you  might  be  both  a  better  and  happier  man, 
if  you  had  not  a  quarter  of  it.  I  deny  that  your 
gaining  one  thousand  is  necessary  either  to  your 
present  or  eternal  happiness.  "But,  however, 
you  must  allow,  these  slaves  are  necessary  for 
the  cultivation  of  our  islands;  inasmuch  as  white 
men  are  not  able  to  labor  in  hot  climates."  I 
■answer,  First,  It  were  better  that  all  those  island* 
should  remain  uncultivated  for  ever  ;  yet,  it  were  more 
desirable  that  they  were  altogether  sunk  in,  the  depth  of 
the  sea,  than  that  they  should  be  cultivated  at  so  high  a 


THOUGHTS  UPON  SLAVERY.  ^17 

price  as  the  violation  of  justice,  mercy,  and  truth.  But, 
Secondly,  the  supposition  on  which  you  ground 
your  argument  is  false.  For  white  men,  even 
Englishmen,  are  well  able  to  labor  in  hot  climates  ; 
provided  they  are  temperate  both  in  meat  and 
drink,  and  that  they  inure  themselves  to  it  by  de- 
grees. I  speak  no  more  than  I  know  by  expe- 
rience. It  appears  from  the  thermometer,  that 
the  summer  heat  in  Georgia  is  frequently  equal 
to  that  in  Barbadoes,  yea,  to  that  under  the  line. 
And  yet  I  and  my  family  (eight  in  number)  did 
employ  all  our  spare  time  there,  in  felling  of  trees 
and  clearing  of  ground,  as  hard  labor  as  any  ne- 
gro need  be  employed  in.  The  German  family 
likewise,  forty  in  number,  were  employed  in  all 
maimer  of  labor.  Ajid  this  was  so  far  from  im- 
pairing our  health,  that  we  all  continued  perfectly 
well,  while  the  idle  ones  round  about  us  were 
swept  away  as  with  a  petilence.  It  is  not  true, 
therefore,  that  white  men  are  not  able  to  labor, 
even  in  hot  climates,  full  as  well  as  black.  But 
if  they  were  not,  it  would  be  better  that  none  should  U> 
bor  there,  that  the  work  should  be  left  undone,  than  that 
myriads  of  innocent  men  should  be  murdered,  and  my- 
riads .more  dragged  into  the  basest  slavery. 

7.  "  But  the  furnishing  us  with  slaves  is  neces- 
sary for  the  trade,  and  wealth,  and  glory  of  our 
nation."  Here  are  several  mistakes.  For,  First, 
wealth  is  not  necessary  to  the  glory  of  any  nation; 
but  wisdom,  virtue,  justice,  mercy,  generosity, 
public  spirit,  love  of  our  country.    These  are  ne« 


218  THOUGHTS  UPON  SLAVERY. 

cessary  to  the  real  glory  of  a  nation ;  but  abunvl. 
ance  of  wealth  is  not.  Men  of  understanding 
allow  that  the  glory  of  England  was  full  as  high 
in  Queen  Elizabeth's  time  as  it  is  now ;  although 
our  riches  and  trade  were  then  as  much  smaller 
as  our  virtue  was  greater.  But,  Secondly,  it  is 
not  clear  that  we  should  have  either  less  money 
or  trade  (only  less  of  that  detestable  trade  of 
man-stealing),  if  there  was  not  a  negro  in  all  our 
islands,  or  in  all  English  America.  It  is  demon- 
strable, white  men,  inured  to  it  by  degrees,  can 
work  as  well  as  them  ;  and  they  would  do  it, 
Avere  negroes  out  of  the  way,  and  proper  encour- 
agement given  them.  However,  Thirdly,  I  come 
back  to  the  same  point..  Better  no  trade  than 
trade  procured  by  villainy.  It  is  far  better  to  have 
no  wealth,  than  to  gain  wealth  at  the  expense  of 
virtue.  Better  w  honest  poverty,  than  all  the  riches 
bought  by  the  tears,  and  sweat,  and  blood  of  our  fellow- 
creatures. 

8.  "  However  this  be,  it  is  necessary,  when  we 
have  slaves,  to  use  them  with  severity."  What, 
to  whip  them  for  every  petty  offence,  till  they  are 
all  in  gore  blood  1  To  take  that  opportunity  of 
rubbing  pepper  and  salt  into  their  raw  flesh  ?  to 
drop  burning  sealing  wax  upon  their  skin  T  to 
castrate  them  ?  to  cut  off  half  their  foot  with  an 
axe  1  to  hang  them  on  gibbets,  that  they  may  die 
by  inches,  with  heat,  and  hunger,  and  thirst  1  to 
pin  them  doUTi  to  the  ground,  and  then  burn  them 
by  degrees  from  the  feet  to  the  head  ?  to  roast 


THOUGHT.?  rPON  SLAVERY.  219 


them  alive  ?  When  did  a  Turk  or  a  Heathen  find 
it  necessary  to  use  a  fellow-creature  thus  1 

I  pray,  to  what  end  is  this  usage  necessary  1 
"  Why,  to  prevent  their  running  away ;  and  to 
keep  them  constantly  to  their  labor,  that  they 
may  not  idle  away  their  time  :  So  miserably  stu- 
pid is  this  race  of  men,  yea,  so  stubborn  and  so 
wicked."  AUouing  them  to  be  as  stupid  as  you 
bay,  to  whom  is  that  stupidity  owing  1  Without 
question,  it  lies  altogether  at  the  door  of  their  in- 
hutsian  masters ;  who  give  them  no  means,  no 
oppoi-4inrty,  of  improving  their  understanding; 
and;  indbod,  leave  them  no  motive,  either  from 
hope  or  feat,  to  attempt  any  such  thing.  They 
were  no  way  remarkable  for  stupidity,  while  they 
remained  in  their  own  country.  The  inhabitants 
of  Africa,  where  they  have  equal  motives  and 
equal  means  of  improvement,  are  not  inferior  to 
the  inhabitants  of  Europe  ;  to  some  of  them  they 
are  greatly  superior.  Impartially  survey  in  their 
own  country,  the  natives  of  Benin,  and  Uie  na- 
tives of  Lapland;  compare  (setting  prejudice 
aside)  the  Samoeids  and  the  Angolans ;  and  on 
which  side  does  the  advantage  lie  in  point  of 
understanding  1  Certainly  the  African  is  in  no 
respect  inferior  to  the  European.  Their  stupidity, 
therefore,  in  our  plantations  is  not  natural ;  other- 
wise than  it  is  the  natural  effect  of  their  condition. 
Consequently,  it  is  not  their  fault,  but  yours.  You 
must  answer  for  it,  before  God  and  man. 

9.  "  But  their  stupidity  is  not  the  only  reason 


220  THOUGHTS  UPON  SLAVERV. 

of  our  treating  them  with  severity.  For  it  is  haid 
to  say,  which  is  the  greatest  this  or  their  stubborn- 
ness and  wickedness."  It  may  be  so  :  but  do  not 
these,  as  well  as  the  other,  lie  at  your  door  1  Are 
not  stubbornness,  cunning,  pilfering,  and  divers 
other  vices,  the  natural,  necessary  fruits  of  slave- 
ry 1  Is  not  this  an  observation  which  has  been 
made  in  every  age  and  nation  1  And  what  means 
have  you  used  to  remove  this  stubbornness  ? 
Have  you  tried  what  mildness  and  gentleness 
would  do  T  I  knew  one  that  did ;  that  had  pru- 
dence and  patience  to  make  the  experiro'Jit;  Mr. 
Hugh  Bryan,  who  then  lived  on  the  borders  of 
South  Carolma.  And  what  was  the  effect? 
Why,  that  all  his  negroes  (.and  he  had  no  small 
number  of  them),  loved  and  reverenced  him  as  a 
father,  and  cheerfut'ly  obeyed  hun  out  of  love. 
Yea,  they  were  more  afraid  of  a  frown  from  him, 
thaii  of  manv  blows  from  an  overseer.  And  what 
pains  have  you  taken,  what  methods  have  you 
useil,  to  reclaim  them  from  their  wickedness? 
Have  you  carefully  taught  them  that  there  is  a 
God,  a  wise,  powerful,  merciful  Being,  the  Crea- 
tor and  Governor  of  heaven  and  earth  1  that  he 
has  appointed  a  day  wherein  he  will  judge  the 
world  ;  will  take  an  account  of  all  our  thoughts, 
words,  and  actions  ?  that  in  that  day  he  will  re- 
ward  every  child  of  man  according  to  his  works  ? 
that  then  the  righteous  shall  inherit  tlie  kuig&om 
prepared  for  them  from  the  foundation  of  the 
wcr'd ;  and  the  wicked  shaU  be  cast  into  ever- 


THOUGHTS  UPON     SLAVERY.  221 


lasting  fire,  prepared  for  the  devil  and  his  angels? 
If  you  have  not  done  this,  if  you  have  taken  no 
pains  or  thought  about  the  matter,  can  you  won- 
der at  their  wickedness  ?  What  wonder  if  they 
should  cut  your  throat  ?  And  if  they  did,  whom 
could  you  thank  for  it  but  yourself?  You  first 
acted  the  villain  in  making  them  slaves,  whether  you 
stole  them  or  bought  them.  You  kept  them  stupid 
and  wicked,  by  cutting  them  off  from  all  oppor- 
tunities of  improving  either  in  knowledge  or 
virtue  !  and  now  you  assign  their  want  of  wisdom 
and  goodness  as  the  reason  for  using  them  worse 
than  brute  beasts ! 

V.  1.  It  remains  only  to  make  a  little  apphca- 
tion  of  the  preceding  observations.  But  to  whom 
should  that  application  be  made  ?  That  may  bear 
a  question.  Should  we  address  ourselves  to  the 
public  at  large  1  What  effect  can  this  have  1  It 
may  inflame  the  world  against  the  guilty,  but  is 
not  likely  to  remove  that  guilt.  Should  we  ap- 
peal to  the  English  nation  in  general  ?  This  also 
is  striking  wide  ;  and  is  never  likely  to  procure 
any  redress  for  the  sore  evil  we  cojnplain  of.  As 
little  would  it  in  all  probability  avail,  to  apply  to 
the  parliament.  So  many  things,  which  seem  of 
greater  importance,  lie  before  them,  that  they  are 
not  likely  to  attend  to  tliis.  I  therefore  add  a  few 
words  to  those  who  are  more  immediately  con- 
oerned,  whether  captains,  merchants,  or  planters. 

2.  And,  First,  to  the  captains  employed  in  this 
trade.  Most  of  you  know  the  country  of  Guinea 


222  THOUGHTS  UPON  SLAVERY. 


several  parts  of  it,  at  least,  between  the  river 
Senegal  and  the  kingdona  of  Angola.  Perhaps, 
now,  by  your  means  part  of  it  is  become  a  dreary, 
uncultivated  wilderness,  the  inhabitants  being  all 
murdered  or  carried  away,  so  that  there  are  none 
left  to  till  the  ground.  But  you  well  know  how 
populous,  how  fruitful,  how  pleasant  it  was  a 
few  years  ago.  You  know,  the  people  were  not 
stupid,  not  wanting  in  sense,  considering  the  few 
means  of  improvement  they  enjoyed.  Neither 
did  you  find  them  savage,  fierce,  cruel,  treacher- 
ous, or  unkind  to  strangers.  On  the  contrary, 
they  were,  in  most  parts,  a  sensible  and  ingeni 
ous  people.  They  were  kind  and  friendly,  courte- 
ous and  obliging,  and  remarkably  fair  and  just  in 
'their  dealings.  Such  are  the  men  whom  you  hire 
their  own  coTintrymen  to  tear  away  from  this 
lovely  country ;  part  by  stealth,  part  by  force, 
part  made  captives  in  those  wars  which  you  raise 
or  foment  on  purpose.  You  have  seen  them  torn 
away, — children  from  their  parents,  parents  from 
their  children ;  husbands  from  their  wives,  wives 
from  their  beloved  husbands,  brethren  and  sisters 
from  each  other.  You  have  dragged  them  who 
had  never  done  you  any  wrong,  perhaps  in  chains, 
from  their  native  shore.  You  have  forced  them 
into  your  ships  like  a  herd  of  swine, — them  who 
had  souls  immortal  as  your  own ;  only  some  of 
them  leaped  into  the  sea,  and  resolutely  stayed 
under  water,  till  they  could  suffer  no  more  from 
you.   You  have  stowed  them  together  as  close  as 


THOUGHTS  UPON  SLAVERY.  223 


ever  they  could  lie,  without  any  regard  either  to 
decency,  or  convenience.  And  when  many  of 
them  had  been  poisoned  by  foul  air,  or  had  sunk 
under  various  hardships,  you  have  seen  their  re- 
mains delivered  to  the  deep,  till  the  sea  should 
give  up  his  dead.  You  have  carried  the  survivors 
into  the  vilest  slavery,  never  to  end  but  with  life ; 
such  slavery  as  is  not  found  among  the  Turks  at 
Algiers,  no,  nor  among  the  Heathens  in  America. 

3.  May  I  speak  plainly  to  you  ?  I  must. 
Love  constrains  me ;  love  to  you,  as  well  as  to 
those  you  are  concerned  with. 

Is  there  a  God  1  You  luiow  there  i^.  Is  he  a 
just  God  1  Then  there  must  be  a  state  of  retribu- 
tion; a  state  wherein  the  just  God  will  reward 
every  man  according  to  his  works.  Then  what 
reward  will  he  render  to  you  ?  0  think  betimes ! 
before  you  drop  into  eternity !  Think  now,  "  He 
shall  have  judgment  without  mercy  that  showed 
no  mercy." 

Are  you  a  man  1  Then  you  should  have  a  hu- 
man heart.  But  have  you  indeed  ?  What  is 
your  heart  made  of?  Is  there  no  such  principle 
as  compassion  there  1  Do  you  never  feel  an- 
other's pain  1  Have  you  no  sympathy,  no  sense 
of  human  wo,  no  pity  for  the  miserable  1  When 
you  saw  the  flowing  eyes,  the  heaving  breasts,  or 
the  bleeding  sides  and  tortured  limbs  of  your  fel- 
low creatures,  was  you  a  stone,  or  a  brute  ?  Did 
you  look  upon  them  with  the  eyes  of  a  tiger  ? 
When  you   squeezed  the  agonizing  creatures 


224  THOUGHtS  UPON  SLAVERT. 


down  in  the  ship,  or  when  you  threw  their  poor 
mangled  remams  into  the  sea,  had  you  no  re- 
lenting "?  Did  not  one  tear  drop  from  your  eye, 
one  sigh  escape  your  breast  ?  Do  you  feel  no 
relenting  now?  If  you  do  not,  you  must  go  on, 
till  the  measure  of  your  iniquities  is  full.  Then 
will  the  great  God  deal  with  you  as  you  have 
dealt  with  them,  and  require  all  their  blood  at 
your  hands.  And  at  "that  day  it  shall  be  more 
tolerable  for  Sodom  and  Gomorrah  than  for  you  !" 
But  if  your  heart  does  relent,  though  in  a  small 
degree,  know  it  is  a  call  from  the  God  of  love. 
And  "to-day,  if  you  will  hear  his  voice,  harden 
not  your  heart."  To-day  resolve,  God  being  your 
helper,  to  escape  for  your  life.  Regard  not 
money !  All  that  a  man  hath  will  he  give  for  his 
life !  Whatever  you  lose,  lose  not  your  soul : 
nothing  can  countervail  that  loss.  Immediately 
quit  the  horrid  trade ;  at  all  events,  be  an  honest 
man. 

4.  This  equally  concerns  every  merchant  who 
is  engaged  in  the  slave  trade.  It  is  you  that  in- 
duce the  African  villain  to  sell  his  countrymen ; 
in  order  thereto,  to  steal,  rob,  murder  men,  wo- 
men, and  children,  without  number,  by  enabling 
the  English  villain  to  pay  him  for  so  doing,  whom 
you  overpay  for  his  execrable  labor.  It  is  your 
money  that  is  the  spring  of  all,  that  empowers  him 
to  go  on :  so  that  whatever  he  or  the  African 
does  in  this  matter  is  all  your  act  and  deed. 
And  is  your  conscience  quite  reconciled  to  this 


THOUGHTS  UPON  SLAVERY.  225 


Does  it  never  reproach  you  at  all  ?  Has  gold  en- 
tirely blinded  your  eyes,  and  stupified  your  heart  T 
Can  you  see,  can  you  feel,  no  harm  therein  ?  Is 
it  doing  as  you  would  be  done  to  ?  Make  the 
case  your  own.  "Master,"  said  a  slave  at 
Liverpool  to  the  merchant  that  owned  him, 
''what,  if  some  of  my  countrymen  were  to  come 
here,  and  take  away  my  mistress,  and  Master  Tom- 
my, and  Master  Billy,  and  carry  them  into  our 
country,  and  make  them  slaves,  how  would  you 
like  it  1  His  answer  was  worthy  of  a  man :  "  I  will 
never  buy  a  slave  more  while  I  live."  0  let  his 
resolution  be  yours !  Have  no  more  any  part  in 
this  detestable  business.  Instant;ly  leave  it  to 
those  unfeeling  wretches,  who 

Laugh  at  human  nature  and  compassion  ! 
Be  you  a  man,  not  a  wolf,  a  devourer  of  the 
human  species !  Be  merciful,  that  you  may  obtain 
mercy  I 

5.  And  this  equally  concerns  every  gentleman 
that  has  an  estate  in  our  American  plantations  • 
yea,  all  slaveholders,  of  whatever  rank  and  degree : 
seeing  men  buyers  are  exactly  on  a  level  with  men 
stealers.  Indeed  you  say,  "I  pay  honestly  for 
my  goods;  and  I  am  not  concerned  to  know  how 
they  are  come  by."  Nay,  but  you  are  ;  you  are 
deeply  concerned  to  know  they  are  honestly 
come  by.  Otherwise  you  are  a  partaker  with  a 
thief,  and  not  a  jot  honester  than  him.  But  yon 
know  they  are  not  honestly  come  by ;  you  know 
they  are  procured  by  means  nothing  near  so 


236  THOUGHTS  UPON  SLAVERT. 


innocent  as  picking  of  pockets,  house  breaking, 
or  robbery  upon  the  highway.  You  know  they 
are  procured  by  a  deliberate  series  of  more  com- 
plicated villainy  (of  fraud,  robbery,  and  murder) 
than  was  ever  practiced  either  by  Mohammedans 
or  Pagans.;  in  particular,  by  murders,  of  all 
kinds  :  by  the  blood  of  the  innocent  poured  upon 
the  ground  lilce  water.  Now,  it  is  your  money 
that  pays  the  merchant,  and  through  him  the 
captain  and  the  African  butchers.  You  therefore 
are  guilty,  yea,  principally  guilty,  of  all  these 
frauds,  robberies,  and  murders.  You  are  the 
-spring  that  puts  all  the  rest  in  motion;  they 
would  not  stir  a  step  without  you  :  therefore  the 
blood  of  all  these  wretches  who  die  before  their 
time,  whether  in  their  country  or  elsewhere,  lies 
upon  your  head.  "The  blood  of  thy  brother" 
(for,  whether 'thou  wilt  believe  it  or  no,  such  he 
is  in  the  sight  of  Him  that  made  him)  crieth 
against  thee  from  the  earth,"  from  the  ship, 
and  from  the  waters.  0,  whatever  it  costs,  put  a 
stop  to  its  cry  before  it  be  too  late ;  instantly,  at 
any  price,  were  it  the  half  of  your  goods,  deliver 
thyself  from  blood-guiltiness!  Thy  hands,  thy 
bed,  thy  furniture,  thy  house,  thy  lands,  are  at 
present  stained  with  blood.  Surely  it  is  enough, 
accumulate  no  more  guilt;  spill  no  more  the 
blood  of  the  innocent!  Do  not  hire  another 
to  shed  blood ;  do  not  pay  him  for  doing  it ! 
Whether  you  are  a  Christian  or  no,  show  yourself 


i 


THOUGHTS  UPON  SLAVERY.  227 


a  man!  Be  not  more  savage  than  a  lion  or 
a  bear. 

6.  Perhaps  you  will  say,  "  I  do  not  buy  any 
negroes ;  I  only  use  those  left  me  by  my  father." 
So  far  is  well ;  but  is  it  enough  to  satisfy  your 
own  conscience?  Had  your  father,  have  you,  has 
any  man  living,  a  right  to  use  another  as  a  slave  7 
It  cannot  he,  even  setting  Revelation  aside.  It  cannot 
be,  that  either  war,  or  contract,  can  give  any  man 
such  a  property  in  another  as  he  has  in  his  sheep 
and  oxen.  Much  less  is  it  possible  that  any  child 
of  man  should  ever  be  born  a  slave.  Liberty  is 
the  right  of  every  human  creature ;  as  soon  as  he 
breathes  the  vital  air ;  and  no  human  law  can  de- 
prive him  of  that  right  which  he  derives  from  the  law 
of  nature. 

If,  therefore,  you  have  any  regard  to  justice  (to 
say  nothing  of  mercy,  nor  the  revealed  law  of 
God,)  render  unto  all  their  ^ue.  Give  liberty  to 
whom  liberty  is  due,  that  is,^o  every  child  of  man, 
to  every  partaker  of  human  nature.  Let  none 
serve  you  but  by  his  own  act  and  deed,  by  his 
own  voluntary  choice.  Away  with  all  whips,  all 
chains,  all  compulsion!  Be  gentle  toward  all 
men ;  and  see  that  you  invariably  do  unto  everj 
OTie  as  you  would  he  should  do  unto  you. 

7.  0  thou  God  of  love,  thou  who  art  loving 
every  man,  and  whose  mercy  is  over  ^ll  thy 
works ;  thou  who  art  the  Father  of  th"  spirits  a 
all  flesh,  and  who  art  rich  in  mercy  luito  all ;  thca 
who  hast  mingled  of  one  blood  all  the  nations  ui 


228  THOUGHTS  UPON  SLAVERY. 


on  earth ;  have  compassion  upon  these  outcasts 
of  "men,  who  are  trodden  down  as  dung  upon  the 
earth !  Arise,  and  help  these  that  have  no  helper, 
whose  blood  is  spilt  upon  the  ground  like  water  ! 
Are  not  these  also  the  work  of  thine  own  hands, 
the  purchase  of  thy  Son's  blood  ?  Stir  them  up 
to  cry  unto  thee  in  the  land  of  their  captivity ; 
and  let  their  complaint  come  up  before  thee  ;  let 
it  enter  into  thy  ears !  Make  even  those  that 
lead  them  away  captive  to  pity  them,  and  tuni 
their  captivity  as  the  rivers  in  the  south.  0 
burst  thou  all  their  chains  in  sunder;  more 
especially  the  chains  of  their  sins  !  Thou  Sav- 
ior of  all,  make  them  free,  that  they  may  be  free 
indeed ! 

The  servile  progeny  of  Ham 

Seize  as  the  purchase  of  thy  blood ! 

Let  all  the  Heathens  know  thy  name  : 
From  idols  to  the  living  God 

The  dark  Americans  convert, 

And  shine  in  every  Pagan  heart ! 


London,  Feb.  26,  1791, 

Dear  Sib, — Unless  the  Divine  power  has  raised  you  up 
to  be  as  Athanasiv,s  contra  mundum,  [Athanasius  against 
the  world,]  I  sec  noi  how  you  can  go  through  your  glori- 
1  O'lRp.nterprise,  in  opposing  that  execrable  villainy,  which 
I  is  the  u;andal  of  religion,  of  England,  and  of  human  na- 
ture. Tjtviess  God  has  raised  you  up  for  this  very  thing, 
you  will  be  vorn  out  by  ihe  opposition  of  men  and  devils. 
But,  "  if  God  U-,  for  you,  who  can  be  against  you  ?"  Are 
111  of  them  together  stronger  than  God  ?  0  "  be  not  weary 
In  well  doing !"   Go  on,  in  the  name  of  God,  and  in  tba 


THOUGHTS  UPON  SLAVERY. 


229 


power  of  Lis  might,  till  even  American  slavery  (the  vilest 
that  ever  saw  the  sun)  shall  vanish  away  before  it. 

Reading  this  morning  a  tract,  wrote  by  a  poor  African,  1 
was  peculiarly  struck  by  that  circumstance, — that  a  man 
who  has  a  black  skin,  being  wronged  or  outraged  by  a 
white  man,  can  have  no  redress  ;  it  being  a  law,  in  all 
our  colonies,  that  the  oath  of  a  black  against  a  white  goes 
for  nothing.    What  villainy  is  this  ? 

That  He  who  has  guided  you  from  your  youth  up,  may 
continue  to  strengthen  you  in  this  and  all  things,  is  the 
prayer  of,  dear  sir. 

Your  affectionate  servant, 

JOHN  WESLEY. 

This  letter  is  supposed  to  have  been  addressed  to  Mr. 
Wilberforce,  and,  as  its  date  shows,  was  written  by  Mr. 
Wesley  only  four  days  before  his  death. —  Ed.  [0/  tht 
Methodist  Book  Room.'i 


INDEX. 

A 

rASC. 

Asbury's  Journal,  Extracts  from   33 

Abolition  condemned  by  the  General  Conference,.  .50,  51 

Asbury's  power,   129 

B 

Baltimore  Conference  on  the  General  Rule,   53 

Bishops'  power,   Ill 

  Examples  of  Oppression,   114,  116 

  Argument  for  it,   117 

Blackstone  on  Slavery   213 

C 

Conference,  action  of  1780,  'S4,  '83,  '8S,   36 

Christian  Guardian  on  Slavery,   56 

Colored  testimony  resolution,   64 

Comfort's  case,   165 

D 

Discipline  of  ISOO  on  Slavery,   33 

Davis,  Samwel,  a  letter  from  41 

Disciplinary  changes  in  favor  of  Slavery,   45,  47 

E 

Everett's  testimony,   42 

Emory's  history,   45 

G 

Garretson's  experience,    43 

Georgia  Conference  on  Slavery   55 

General  Conlerence  of  1840,  on  Slavery,   59,  63 

of  1844,       "    165 

Golden  rule  for  Slavery,    03 

I. 

Laws  of  Methodism  how  enacted,   109 

Laymens'  rights  argued,   132—145 

Local  Preachers  support !   155 

Letter  to  Wilberforce,     .  ..^  ..  ,  22S 


M 

Methodist  Episcopacy  examined,   P9— 108 

Memliership  of  Ihe  M.  E.  Church  how  controlled   113 

Dr.  Bond's  testimony   131 

Ministerial  Authority  in  that  church,   125 

N 

New  York  Conference,  c.i.  Abolitionism,   52,  53 

O 

Ohio  Conference  m.  Abolitionism,  52 

O'Keliey's  proposition   11% 

P 

Primitive  cliurcb  government   119 

Power  of  Methodist  Bishops,    126 — 9 

Presiding  Elder  power   130 

Providence  Conference  on  the  Discipline   187 

R 

Resolution  Bishop  Waugh  refused  to  put  at  the  New 

England  Conference,  1S42,   64,  113 

Reform  impracticable,   147 

Republicanism  and  Methodism  compared,  57 — 64 

Review  by  E.  Smith,  of  Methodism  and  Slavery,  170—190 
S 

Secession  from  pro-Slavery  churches  argued,  ....  65 — 86 
"  from  the  M.  E.  Church  noticed  from  1791  to  1842,  152-4 
T 

Thoughts  on  Slavery,  by  John  Wesley,   193—229 

W 

Withdrawal  of  Horton,  Scott  and  Sunderland,   3 

do       of  Luther  Lee   16 

Wesley  and  the  English  Wesleyans  on  Slavery, . . .  25 — 28 

Wesley's  Opinion  of  Bishops  and  Elders,   144 

 in  favor  of  church  independence,   145 


I 


DATE  DUE 

CArtOHO 

PKIMTBOIHU.a.. 

BX8393  .S42 

The  grounds  of  secession  from  the  M.E. 


Princeton  Theological  Seminary-Speer  Library 


1  1012  00044  0778 


